Albert Zeyer wrote:
As Michael said, you can cover a very huge range of systems if you
distribute an i386 and AMD64 version. (But you should have in mind, that
there are also some people with other architectures...) Most
closed-source applications for Linux are only available for these (for
example Google Earth and others), Opera for example still also provides
a version for PPC. (I, as a Linux/PPC user, am a little bit frustaded
about the situation, that I cannot use Flash, Google Earth, official ATI
drivers, ...)
Ouch. That hurts.
If you distribute a Windows application, you normaly also only
distribute a i386 version of it.
Yes. Very convenient.
But as an Open Source developer, I surely recommend you to distribute
the source. :)
And you are right: Only if you distribute the source, you can ensure,
that your application will run nearly everywhere.
This particular piece of software is a simple xml based TCP server
written in Laz/FP for a Windows client software so I have no problem
with providing the source.
Personally, I just don't think it would be very convenient to customers
to have to download the FP compiler and compile the software.
Maybe binaries by default with access to the source if they want
it...this way a large majority of linux users could use the binary as
is, but users with less prevelant distros would still be ok, if a little
more inconvienced.
--
Warm Regards,
Lee
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
