Am Wednesday 17 October 2012 11:10:22 schrieb Mark Morgan Lloyd: > Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: > > On 2012-10-17 01:40, Frank Church wrote: > >> As the solution doesn't seem to be too difficult which file or files can > >> "we" zoom in on to fix it? > > > > Thanks for showing interest in this. I know near zero about Makefiles > > and Makefile.fpc. I'm still a bit confused with FPC though. Does FPC now > > use fpmake everywhere? If yes, then why are there still so many > > Makefiles in FPC Trunk? Quite possibly I just don't understand the use > > of fpmake I guess. > > > > The idea seems quite simple though. Do a `$compiler -iV` where $compiler > > is the starting compiler use to compile the FPC source code. If that > > version doesn't match a known "latest stable compiler version" constant, > > then report an error and terminate. > > Some slack would be desirable: stable is 2.6.0 but there are known > issues which are fixed by 2.6.1. Perhaps we need something like > "FORCE=1" to allow a minor version bump to be accepted, or "FORCE=1.1" > to accept anything up to 2.7.1.
ACCEPTEDVERSION="x.x.x" also could be a flexible solution. > However the thing that's really needed in my opinion is a clear > statement for each SVN tag which FPC version should be used for > compilation. Ditto for Lazarus, it shouldn't be necessary to delve into > the source to find this. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal