> On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Marco van de Voort wrote: > > Good, so now we are COM compatible again? This because I am planning to port > > the OpenOffice bridge. > > > > However that uses COM _and_ packages. (though I hope to get rid of the > > need for pacakges) > > How can it require packages ? Packages are just a distribution tool. > The code itself should in no way refer to packages ?
I don't exactly know why, but the program doesn't work when you turn packages off. (note that FPC fails in yet another point) I have to inspect it further, but I suspect he defines an own COM component, which is then registered (which is maybe only possible for a DLL), but at the same time he doesn't really master EXE-DLL communication (using non automated), thus made it a package. The source is quite a mess (Clootie's btw, but earlier work) That's why I have some hope it can be eliminated. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
