Reinier Olislagers wrote:
On 17-10-2012 12:49, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 2012-10-17 10:10, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Some slack would be desirable: stable is 2.6.0 but there are known
issues which are fixed by 2.6.1.
Nope, the FPC developers made the rules quite clear! Not even the fixes
branch is guaranteed to compile FPC Trunk. ONLY the last released FPC is
guaranteed. I have even stumbled over this too, where the fixes branch
couldn't compile FPC Trunk, but the latest released version could.
Graeme, I know what policy is. However I'd point out that right now you
/need/ 2.6.1 to compile FPC for SPARC due to code generation issues, and
there have previously been similar problems with ARM while FP stuff was
work-in-progress.
So saying "if it won't compile with stable then sod off" isn't helpful.
Mark, I understand what you mean.
Regardless of the way Graeme put his point, I think having:
- a rough check on latest stable compiler
- a way to force the makefile to override the check for people who need
this such as SPARC users)
will lessen the amount of problems significantly
I agree, I was only arguing with the dogmaticism of Graeme's assertion.
--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk
[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
