[Debichem-devel] RFH/RFC: gfortran transition (status information)

[Daniel Leidert]

Am Mittwoch, den 27.02.2008, 15:54 +0100 schrieb Michael Banck:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 02:29:55AM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote:

[..]
> >   The package (build-)depends on libf2c2(-dev) instead of libg2c0(-dev)
> >   now. However, we could get rid of the dependency by building the
> >   library from the FORTRAN sources. An explanation how to achieve this
> >   can be found at http://bugs.debian.org/465723 (including a statement
> >   by Tommi Hassinen). But I'm quite busy atm, so please feel free to
> >   step forward and take over testing this solution if possible. The
> >   FORTRAN patch to fix the programming bugs has already been added to
> >   our SVN. The s_copy() call in fdate.c needs to be replaced.
> 
> I wondered about this as well a while ago, and I think it'd be an
> elegant solution if ghemical et al. work fine afterwards with this.

That's indeed the question. Do we just want to jump into the water and
test this in unstable?

> We would have to check the C source for additional changes/bugfixes not
> done on the Fortran source though

AFAIK one file tells, that something has been changed. But I checked the
files mentioned there and found no differences between the f2c generated
source and the C source shipped with the upstream tarball:

$ cd fortran && for i in *.f ; do f2c -d../src_f2c $i ; done
$ cd ..
$ diff -puN --recursive --exclude=*.Plo --exclude="*.Po" \
            --exclude="Makefile*" --exclude=etime.c \
            --exclude=fdate.c --exclude=libmopac7.c \
            --exclude=libmopac7.h src_f2c/ src/ | less

There are only changes in esp.c and symtrz.c that are caused by my small
fixes to the FORTRAN source (see the patch in SVN). Without applying
this patch, the sources are the same here too.

BTW: There are some warnings by f2c about the FORTRAN sources. Probably
issues we should fix too.

> (but it is my understanding that this
> is discouraged or even forbidden)

"Forbidden"? Do you mean the comment by Tommi? I think, bug-fixes are
ok.

[openbabel/gfortran transition]
> The important point here is that if we change the library names, then
> the old libraries will be removed from unstable and the ghemical package
> will be uninstallable, i.e. will need a rebuild, which would reset the
> openbabel1->2 transition.
>
> So we should really wait for the libopenbabel1->2 transition before
> starting the gfortran transition, as painful as this is.

Should happen these days. gcp has been finally built on mips recently.
Yeah!

Regards, Daniel