Hi,
excuse me for this question ;-)
Closing bug report is task for reporter of bug or is not (so leave it
resolved and bug will close somebody later?) ?
Thanks
Laco.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
On 09 May 2011, at 09:20, LacaK wrote:
Closing bug report is task for reporter of bug or is not (so leave
it resolved and bug will close somebody later?) ?
It's best if the bug reporter closes it once he's verified that the
bug has been fixed. Many people don't do that (maybe we should
Στις 7/5/2011 8:49 μμ, ο/η Marco van de Voort έγραψε:
In our previous episode, dioanni...@artesoft.gr said:
is it possible to apply the fix of issue
http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=18894 also to branch fixes_2.4 ?
The next 2.4 release is already packed, and probably the branch will
In our previous episode, Dimitrios Chr. Ioannidis said:
In our previous episode, dioanni...@artesoft.gr said:
is it possible to apply the fix of issue
http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=18894 also to branch fixes_2.4 ?
The next 2.4 release is already packed, and probably the branch
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Marcos Douglas m...@delfire.net wrote:
I resolved. Path in attachment (copy from /trunk).
Hello, somebody can confirm this, please?
Thanks.
Marcos Douglas
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 09 May 2011, at 09:20, LacaK wrote:
Closing bug report is task for reporter of bug or is not (so leave it
resolved and bug will close somebody later?) ?
It's best if the bug reporter closes it once he's verified that the bug
has been fixed. Many people don't do that
On 09 May 2011, at 12:54, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Is there a polite way for a reporter who's submitted a fix to ping
management when the bug's not been assigned to anybody?
You can always ask about it here, or add a ping comment to the bug
(the latter will put it back at the top of the
Some days ago I stated that the build-in macros %LINE% and %FILE%, used
inside a macro, expand to the wrong (in my opinion) info from the
defining context and not to those from the expanding context.
That makes them nearly useless, because using them inside a macro for
debugging purposes is their
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 07:47 -0300, Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Marcos Douglas m...@delfire.net wrote:
I resolved. Path in attachment (copy from /trunk).
Hello, somebody can confirm this, please?
A quick look on your patch is that you want to include the 32-bit
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Joost van der Sluis jo...@cnoc.nl wrote:
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 07:47 -0300, Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Marcos Douglas m...@delfire.net wrote:
I resolved. Path in attachment (copy from /trunk).
Hello, somebody can confirm
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 10:14 -0300, Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Joost van der Sluis jo...@cnoc.nl wrote:
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 07:47 -0300, Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Marcos Douglas m...@delfire.net wrote:
I resolved. Path in
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Joost van der Sluis jo...@cnoc.nl wrote:
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 10:14 -0300, Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Joost van der Sluis jo...@cnoc.nl wrote:
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 07:47 -0300, Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at
A little further changing is needed to let it work as suspected. Even
if the macro is included via include file. In my first writing I didn't
recognize that the calling of insertmacro for _ID token is done with
mac.fileinfo.line and .fileindex, which is the point of definition.
Changed to
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Marcos Douglas m...@delfire.net wrote:
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Joost van der Sluis jo...@cnoc.nl wrote:
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 10:14 -0300, Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Joost van der Sluis jo...@cnoc.nl
wrote:
Am Mon, 9 May 2011 17:23:30 -0300
schrieb Marcos Douglas m...@delfire.net:
I use /fixes_2_4 but I could not to compile (error in first mail).
So, I took a look in sources from /trunk. I compared this files
(odbcsql) and saw this difference between them (the patch).
Did you understand?
Hi,
I've created a trivial front end for fppkg (see lazarus mailing list) but
working on this I realized that they are not grouped in any way. Currently with
approx. 70 packages this is not a real problem, but if the system will get used
more widely it will be impossible to deduct the purpose
16 matches
Mail list logo
