Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions [one resolved]
Thanks Mark. I haven't gotten to my SPARC boxes yet. Since I already had a copy of 2.6.0 built on my Linux box I was playing around with building there first. -Original Message- From: Mark Morgan Lloyd Sender: fpc-pascal-boun...@lists.freepascal.org Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 09:05:55 To: Reply-To: FPC-Pascal users discussions Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions [one resolved] microc...@zoho.com wrote: > On Tue, 22 May 2012 10:29:28 +0200 Sven Barth > wrote: > >> This might be, because you compiled it without a libgdb which in turn is >> the one who links dynamically to libc. Most FPC applications (if they >> don't use threads or a WideString manager) don't require libc and thus >> don't need to link to it (which AFAIK is also the case for the IDE if it >> doesn't link to libgdb). > > That's a good explanation, thank you. I would like to have the debugger > support. That will require that you can find a precompiled libgdb- preferably a version that's already supported by the options in gdbint.pp. Or build one from source (which I've done on several systems). I've just checked my SPARC Solaris 10 and I've not gone to the trouble: fp was built without gdblib. > I'm planning to go through the build again a few times for various reasons > including I want to get a current copy on Solaris SPARC. I didn't get (all) > the units built and there are some other minor annoyances in the way it > worked out (no symlink from fpc to the ppcx module) and if it doesn't go > like you said I'll post back to the list. You normally have to set up the ppc symlink manually, irrespective or platform. I usually use two stages, e.g. ppcsparc -> ppcsparc-2.4.4 and ppcsparc-2.4.4 -> /usr/local/lib/fpc/2.4.4/ppcsparc, and in cases where I'm e.g. running Lazarus I tell it to use the "one in the middle" i.e. ppcsparc-2.4.4. -- 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 ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions [one resolved]
microc...@zoho.com wrote: On Tue, 22 May 2012 10:29:28 +0200 Sven Barth wrote: This might be, because you compiled it without a libgdb which in turn is the one who links dynamically to libc. Most FPC applications (if they don't use threads or a WideString manager) don't require libc and thus don't need to link to it (which AFAIK is also the case for the IDE if it doesn't link to libgdb). That's a good explanation, thank you. I would like to have the debugger support. That will require that you can find a precompiled libgdb- preferably a version that's already supported by the options in gdbint.pp. Or build one from source (which I've done on several systems). I've just checked my SPARC Solaris 10 and I've not gone to the trouble: fp was built without gdblib. I'm planning to go through the build again a few times for various reasons including I want to get a current copy on Solaris SPARC. I didn't get (all) the units built and there are some other minor annoyances in the way it worked out (no symlink from fpc to the ppcx module) and if it doesn't go like you said I'll post back to the list. You normally have to set up the ppc symlink manually, irrespective or platform. I usually use two stages, e.g. ppcsparc -> ppcsparc-2.4.4 and ppcsparc-2.4.4 -> /usr/local/lib/fpc/2.4.4/ppcsparc, and in cases where I'm e.g. running Lazarus I tell it to use the "one in the middle" i.e. ppcsparc-2.4.4. -- 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
Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions [one resolved]
On Tue, 22 May 2012 10:29:28 +0200 Sven Barth wrote: > This might be, because you compiled it without a libgdb which in turn is > the one who links dynamically to libc. Most FPC applications (if they > don't use threads or a WideString manager) don't require libc and thus > don't need to link to it (which AFAIK is also the case for the IDE if it > doesn't link to libgdb). That's a good explanation, thank you. I would like to have the debugger support. I'm planning to go through the build again a few times for various reasons including I want to get a current copy on Solaris SPARC. I didn't get (all) the units built and there are some other minor annoyances in the way it worked out (no symlink from fpc to the ppcx module) and if it doesn't go like you said I'll post back to the list. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions [one resolved]
Am 21.05.2012 14:59, schrieb microc...@zoho.com: On Wed, 9 May 2012 17:40:40 +0200 (CEST) "Tomas Hajny" wrote: On Wed, May 9, 2012 16:14, microcode wrote: Another question is on 2.6.0 on Linux. I cannot run the fp ide because I ave glibc 2.9. The error message I get says fp: /lib64/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by fp) That is really a recent version! Even the latest Slackware from 1 year ago only has glibc 2.13. Is this really needed or can it be built against my version of glibc? It should be possible to build against your version of glibc, but you'll probably have to do it yourself (or use FPC binaries provided by your distribution). Search for 'buildfaq.pdf' in order to learn more on how to build FPC yourself. Hooray! See attached. Thanks Tomas! Interestingly enough, the build process I stumbled through created statically linked executables. In 2.6.0 fp was dynamically linked and pointed to a copy of glibc I didn't have. In the 2.7.1 I created today, fp is static and has no dependency on a particular version of anything. I wonder if it could be created that way generically in the regular build process and then everybody on Linux could run it. This might be, because you compiled it without a libgdb which in turn is the one who links dynamically to libc. Most FPC applications (if they don't use threads or a WideString manager) don't require libc and thus don't need to link to it (which AFAIK is also the case for the IDE if it doesn't link to libgdb). Regards, Sven ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions
On Thu, May 10, 2012 08:45, Sven Barth wrote: > Am 09.05.2012 20:19, schrieb microc...@zoho.com: There are no binaries provided by my distribution. It's Slackware! But the question was, was it really necessary to use such a recent glibc? >> >>> It's a matter of what the libc version happens to be on the system that >>> was used to build libgdb, which is simply someone's personal machine. >> >> Ok, but if that is what happened I would expect a lot of people not to >> be >> able to run fp except maybe Fedora 16 or Gentoo users who always have >> the >> latest stuff. I guess I am wrong though or you would already know about >> it. >> Maybe it would be better to build on a non-bleeding edge system so >> people >> with older distros and pieces could still run everything? I very seldom >> upgrade but maybe everybody else does. I try to find a good working >> setup >> and then don't change it much. That's kind of why I was asking about >> 2.6.0 >> since it is the current release. I was planning on staying on that until >> I >> had a really good reason not to. > > The text mode IDE "fp" is not used that much on Unix based systems thus > such problems regarding to recent/old libraries are not detected that > easily. On other systems like OS/2 (where "fp" is used more often) and > Windows there aren't such dependency problems. . . Also, e.g. people using Debian would probably use fp from the .deb packages rather than the .tar.gz distribution. The .deb packages are created elsewhere and their dependencies are compatible with the appropriate Debian version. Tomas ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
[fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions
Thu, 10 May 2012 08:45:14 +0200 Sven Barth wrote > The text mode IDE "fp" is not used that much on Unix based systems thus > such problems regarding to recent/old libraries are not detected that > easily. That would explain it! But I saw fp once and I loved it, very Borland Turbo! > Most users use a graphical IDE like Lazarus: > http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/ Thanks, I'll look. But I will probably be just as happy or happier with fp. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions
Sven Barth wrote: Am 09.05.2012 20:19, schrieb microc...@zoho.com: There are no binaries provided by my distribution. It's Slackware! But the question was, was it really necessary to use such a recent glibc? It's a matter of what the libc version happens to be on the system that was used to build libgdb, which is simply someone's personal machine. Ok, but if that is what happened I would expect a lot of people not to be able to run fp except maybe Fedora 16 or Gentoo users who always have the latest stuff. I guess I am wrong though or you would already know about it. Maybe it would be better to build on a non-bleeding edge system so people with older distros and pieces could still run everything? I very seldom upgrade but maybe everybody else does. I try to find a good working setup and then don't change it much. That's kind of why I was asking about 2.6.0 since it is the current release. I was planning on staying on that until I had a really good reason not to. The text mode IDE "fp" is not used that much on Unix based systems thus such problems regarding to recent/old libraries are not detected that easily. On other systems like OS/2 (where "fp" is used more often) and Windows there aren't such dependency problems. Most users use a graphical IDE like Lazarus: http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/ I agree. I harboured illusions at one point about being able to work out how fp was put together and tracking down some of the issues (mostly related to debugging, i.e. libgdb) but in practice I've gone with the flow and started using Lazarus. Having said which, I think I've got fp running on all the systems here (with the possible exception of Solaris 8), and I've got libgdb running with all of those (with the exception of ARM Linux). -- 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
Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions
microc...@zoho.com wrote: I screwed up the quoting here, sorry. Jeff didn't write all below, I think some of it was Mark. On Wed, 09 May 2012 18:01:43 -0400 Jeff Wormsley wrote: And what, pray, is wrong with Slackware? :-) Nothing :-) Once you Slack you never go back! Most of the SPARC systems around here are Debian (plus one each of Solaris 8 and 10), but I've got Slackware 12 IIRC on an E4500 since the Debian installer wouldn't work. Good machine for testing multithreaded stuff on account of the number of CPUs. Hah! I didn't even think of that. I've been thinking it would be nice to have a SPARC port of Slackware but it hasn't been maintained. How many sockets do you have on your E4500? 12, i.e. space for an I/O card and internal discs for booting. I prefer the SS1000 architecture, where each of the eight cards is identical so you can have 16x CPUs plus full I/O... in addition being a Xerox PARC design it has a certain pedigree ;-) -- 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
Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions
Am 09.05.2012 20:19, schrieb microc...@zoho.com: There are no binaries provided by my distribution. It's Slackware! But the question was, was it really necessary to use such a recent glibc? It's a matter of what the libc version happens to be on the system that was used to build libgdb, which is simply someone's personal machine. Ok, but if that is what happened I would expect a lot of people not to be able to run fp except maybe Fedora 16 or Gentoo users who always have the latest stuff. I guess I am wrong though or you would already know about it. Maybe it would be better to build on a non-bleeding edge system so people with older distros and pieces could still run everything? I very seldom upgrade but maybe everybody else does. I try to find a good working setup and then don't change it much. That's kind of why I was asking about 2.6.0 since it is the current release. I was planning on staying on that until I had a really good reason not to. The text mode IDE "fp" is not used that much on Unix based systems thus such problems regarding to recent/old libraries are not detected that easily. On other systems like OS/2 (where "fp" is used more often) and Windows there aren't such dependency problems. Most users use a graphical IDE like Lazarus: http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/ Regards, Sven ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
[fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions
I screwed up the quoting here, sorry. Jeff didn't write all below, I think some of it was Mark. On Wed, 09 May 2012 18:01:43 -0400 Jeff Wormsley wrote: > And what, pray, is wrong with Slackware? :-) Nothing :-) Once you Slack you never go back! > Most of the SPARC systems around here are Debian (plus one each of > Solaris 8 and 10), but I've got Slackware 12 IIRC on an E4500 since > the Debian installer wouldn't work. Good machine for testing > multithreaded stuff on account of the number of CPUs. Hah! I didn't even think of that. I've been thinking it would be nice to have a SPARC port of Slackware but it hasn't been maintained. How many sockets do you have on your E4500? > I don't think the OP meant he was running Slackware on Sun hardware, > although maybe he (or she, I suppose) was. It seemed to me there were > two mostly unrelated questions: 1) How to get FPC on Solaris? and 2) Why > doesn't FPC work on his version of Slackware Linux. Right. At the beginning I just wanted FPC for my Solaris boxes. Since the current stable version wasn't available for Solaris or at least so I thought until Ludo pointed me to the Intel versions, I decided to try it on Linux. Then I found fp doesn't work on my Linux setup because of not having a very recent glibc. But yes, I'm hoping to get FPC working on Solaris SPARC now that I have the copy for Solaris Intel. Thanks to all. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
[fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions
On Wed, 9 May 2012 19:02:16 +0200 (CEST) "Tomas Hajny" wrote: > My point was that there has been no official / dedicated maintainer for > that platform within the core team recently which is the reason why there > are no official builds for Solaris for version 2.6.0. Mark Morgan Lloyd > who already responded to your e-mail probably has the most experience > with these targets at the moment. Yeah I checked and other platforms had people listed as maintainers. Uh oh! > > There are no binaries provided by my distribution. It's Slackware! But > > the question was, was it really necessary to use such a recent glibc? > I'm not sure what's the supposed meaning of "It's Slackware!" in your > e-mail. We do not actively track which Linux distributions support FPC > directly. Oh sorry, I thought everybody knew about Slackware since it is the oldest Linux distro still being maintained. It is mostly about building everything you want yourself but has no package management and no repo. It comes with a ton of development tools but most apps are not there. They *should* put Free Pascal on there though! > Anyway, the particular glibc version was probably selected by the ld > linker when compiling the binaries on the builder's machine. We cannot > guarantee compatibility of the provided binaries with specific Linux > distributions. Understood but it seems like it would be good to intentionally not use bleeding-edge setups to build in prereqs that people might not have, unless you actually need them. So my question was really about whether FPC could run with my older glibc or whether you really needed the latest. > Our _compiler_ does not use glibc at all on Linux - the main reason being > exactly the fact that it's very difficult to ensure compatibility with > different versions used by different distributions. Yeah I noticed that, the compiler works great. Well done. > The good point for you out of that is that you should be able to use the > distributed compiler for rebuilding the IDE on your own machine and > linking to the glibc version available there. Yes, I'll try it. I got the buildfaq and will go over it next week. > (which may or may not be due to some bug in our installer, but that is > hard to assess without more specific information). Please check what's > going on there and possibly see our FAQ for common issues. I realize that. That's why I asked whether I should post here. I just didn't want to start blasting the list with a bunch of error messages for stuff you already know doesn't work or nobody cares about. I will go over the FAQ and get more info obviously. Thanks for the help guys. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
[fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions
On Wed, 9 May 2012 18:44:08 +0200 Jonas Maebe wrote: > There is no real Solaris maintainer. Pierre sometimes works on it and I > run nightly Solaris/SPARC regression tests (for as long as I still have > access to a Solaris/SPARC machine), but I definitely do not support the > platform. Solaris/SPARC is on life support, as far as I am concerned: I > try to make sure that port doesn't get new bugs, but I don't work on > fixing any existing bugs in it. I don't know to what extent Pierre wants > to support Solaris/i386 and Solaris/x86-64. Thanks, that is important to know. My main use would be on Solaris, possibly the SPARC version so if the project doesn't view that platform as having a future I would rather know now. > > There are no binaries provided by my distribution. It's Slackware! But > > the question was, was it really necessary to use such a recent glibc? > It's a matter of what the libc version happens to be on the system that > was used to build libgdb, which is simply someone's personal machine. Ok, but if that is what happened I would expect a lot of people not to be able to run fp except maybe Fedora 16 or Gentoo users who always have the latest stuff. I guess I am wrong though or you would already know about it. Maybe it would be better to build on a non-bleeding edge system so people with older distros and pieces could still run everything? I very seldom upgrade but maybe everybody else does. I try to find a good working setup and then don't change it much. That's kind of why I was asking about 2.6.0 since it is the current release. I was planning on staying on that until I had a really good reason not to. > > I believe they are fpc libraries but I will have to check again. Do you > > expect that all of the examples will normally build on Linux without > > errors or is it normal to have some problems? > The examples are probably one of the worst maintained parts of the > distribution, because almost nobody uses them. That said, some of them > certainly will require the development versions of certain libraries to > be installed (e.g., some of them use ncurses, so you'll need to have the > development package of ncurses to be installed to compile them). Thanks for the info here also. I have ncurses and almost every possible development tool and toolkit installed. I am careful not to randomly install non-development libraries though. If the examples are not maintained or used then I'll just do the best I can. I don't have any experience with Pascal so I was glad to see some sample code. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
