Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

support additional architectures with autoconf #68

Open
bernstei opened this issue Feb 10, 2021 · 9 comments
Open

support additional architectures with autoconf #68

bernstei opened this issue Feb 10, 2021 · 9 comments

Comments

@bernstei
Copy link
Contributor

It would be nice if FoX's autoconf stuff was updated to support newer architectures, e.g. aarch64 and ppc64le. I don't really know much about autoconf, but would hope that it's as simple as updating autoconf itself, rerunning whatever generates files like config.sub, and pushing those back in. Is there anyone who already knows how to do this?

@bernstei
Copy link
Contributor Author

I guess maybe #4 is the reason this hasn't been done before :(

@bernstei
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have a tentative patch that makes FoX compatible with modern autoconf 2.69, at the expense of going back to relying entirely on the autoconf-distributed lang.m4 and fortran.m4, and therefore probably losing compatibility with some old compilers, e.g. ones that cannot do their own source preprocessing.

@andreww is that of interest, or would you rather not break that level of backward compatibility, or have another reason to avoid it?

@andreww
Copy link
Owner

andreww commented Feb 12, 2021

Yes - #4 (and my lack of time and fading ability with m4) has been the barrier to this kind of thing.

I think the exchange of the loss of some backward compatibility for a more updatable build system is fair. So yes @bernstei, a patch to update to a modern autoconf would be awesome. I need to merge a bunch of other patches and push out a new version, but I don't think this interacts with with any of that.

@andreww
Copy link
Owner

andreww commented Feb 23, 2021

Can this be closed now or is additional work/testing needed?

@bernstei
Copy link
Contributor Author

bernstei commented Feb 23, 2021 via email

@bernstei
Copy link
Contributor Author

Looks like we may also need newer versions of config.sub and/or config.guess. Should I start a new PR for that?

@andreww
Copy link
Owner

andreww commented Feb 24, 2021

Yes please. I wonder if it's just a case of using new ones from the autoconf source or if it will need more thought?

@andreww
Copy link
Owner

andreww commented Mar 4, 2021

I think this is now fixed on master.

@bernstei
Copy link
Contributor Author

bernstei commented Mar 4, 2021 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants