On Mon, February 17, 2014 17:37, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > On Mon, 17 Feb 2014, Tomas Hajny wrote: > >>> I agree that the best option would be to use the -V and -P options of >>> fpc. >>> >>> But, for this, it would be best if fpc can list the available versions >>> and >>> architectures/cross-compilers. >> >> Assuming that list of supported FPC installations should be configurable >> by the user in Lazarus settings, listing of versions wouldn't be >> necessary >> (it would be incomplete anyway in many cases). I see no use for -V in >> this >> use case either (due to differences between global and local >> installations >> and also installations in non-standard places). I believe that -Xp >> should >> cover everything needed (at least as long as that parameter is supported >> by the installed FPC version; if not, invoking fpc with a modified PATH >> would be my suggested solution). > > I think you are wrong. > > -Xp is there for the case you have a special setup. > > -V is there for standard installations, so you don't need to know the > paths. > > I think it is by far preferable to use the latter. > If you're not going to use/encourage it, you'd better remove it > altogether.
I certainly don't need to be right here ;-) but my thought was that if Lazarus wanted to cater for both standard installations (releases) and non-standard ones (allowing users to configure them inside Lazarus rather than expecting that Lazarus should detect them automatically, of course) as suggested by Mattias in his earlier e-mail, using -Xp would be a more generic solution. That obviously does not imply that -V shouldn't be used with fpc for other use cases, it's just that it may not fit the Lazarus need completely (as far as I understood Mattias correctly, of course). Tomas _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - [email protected] http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
