On 10/23/06, Daniel Hobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of peter green
Sent: Monday, 23 October 2006 9:28 AM
To: FPC developers' list
Subject: RE: [fpc-devel] FPC 2.0.4
> Currently we have been
> Currently we have been developing on FPC for both Windows and Linux and we
>have noticed that socket communications are not working correctly under
Linux environments.
please define what you mean by not working correctly, preferally with a test
app
> I have also been advised that the netdb has
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of peter green
Sent: Monday, 23 October 2006 9:28 AM
To: FPC developers' list
Subject: RE: [fpc-devel] FPC 2.0.4
> Currently we have been developing on FPC for both Windows and Linux and we
>have n
Op Wed, 30 Aug 2006, schreef Florian Klaempfl:
> That's what I would recommend nvidia for years: provide their drivers as
> assembler files. Nobody can proof that it is actually compiled and they
> don't release more knowledge than they actually do and the gpl trolls
> can't flame anymore :)
Nv
Micha Nelissen wrote:
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
That's what I would recommend nvidia for years: provide their drivers as
assembler files. Nobody can proof that it is actually compiled and they
don't release more knowledge than they actually do and the gpl trolls
can't flame anymore :)
Nobody wil
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
> That's what I would recommend nvidia for years: provide their drivers as
> assembler files. Nobody can proof that it is actually compiled and they
> don't release more knowledge than they actually do and the gpl trolls
> can't flame anymore :)
Nobody will believe they han
Come on, the linux package systems are stupid and stupid systems can be
fooled. One can provide a fpc bootstrap package containing precompiled
assembler files which are assembled when built.
That's what I would recommend nvidia for years: provide their drivers as
assembler files. Nobody can proof
>
>> I would love to be a maintainer and build .deb files, however I do not
>> own a 64 bit CPU and can't afford one at the moment because it would
>> also mean a new motherboard and RAM too, so that crosses me out pretty
>> much. In fact, I really would love to see Free Pascal packages in the
>> U
Hello,
On 8/28/06, Rob van der Linde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thank you very much, I was waiting for the release of 2.0.4 so I could
compile .DEB packages for Ubuntu Dapper as I had previously compiled the
2.0.2 release for Ubuntu for people to download. I just found out that
there are now off
On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 22:05 +0100, peter green wrote:
> the problem is that ubuntu has a general policy against binary uploads
> (because it ensures that the packages can indeed be built on systems
> other than the maintainers private system).
I think that this is the case for all distributions.
On 29 Aug 06, at 22:05, peter green wrote:
> > For the recursive build-dep. This is a onetime issue.
> This is making the rather uncertain assumption that each version
> can be built with the last (not true with all 1.9.x versions
> though maybe more effort is being made post 2.0.0).
FPC policy
Op Tue, 29 Aug 2006, schreef peter green:
>
> > For the recursive build-dep. This is a onetime issue.
> This is making the rather uncertain assumption that each version can be
> built with the last (not true with all 1.9.x versions though maybe more
> effort is being made post 2.0.0).
It i
> For the recursive build-dep. This is a onetime issue.
This is making the rather uncertain assumption that each version can be built
with the last (not true with all 1.9.x versions though maybe more effort is
being made post 2.0.0).
>The
> maintainer needs once to make
> a binary upload and
On 29 Aug 06, at 19:50, Stefan Kisdaroczi wrote:
> peter green schrieb:
.
.
> [1] The current issue:
> Until freepascal 2.0.4-rc3 the deb build worked as it should, but with the
> the final release is fails.
> The reason was the missing libgdb binary. So I downloaded it and it worked
> again, b
On 29 Aug 06, at 18:46, Rob van der Linde wrote:
.
.
> I would love to be a maintainer and build .deb files, however I do not
> own a 64 bit CPU and can't afford one at the moment because it would
> also mean a new motherboard and RAM too, so that crosses me out pretty
> much. In fact, I really w
Hi,
peter green schrieb:
>> I would love to be a maintainer and build .deb files, however I do not
>> own a 64 bit CPU and can't afford one at the moment because it would
>> also mean a new motherboard and RAM too, so that crosses me out pretty
>> much. In fact, I really would love to see Free Pas
> I would love to be a maintainer and build .deb files, however I do not
> own a 64 bit CPU and can't afford one at the moment because it would
> also mean a new motherboard and RAM too, so that crosses me out pretty
> much. In fact, I really would love to see Free Pascal packages in the
> Ubuntu
Stefan Kisdaroczi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Daniël Mantione wrote:
>> Op Tue, 29 Aug 2006, schreef Rob van der Linde:
>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> It would be nice to see 64 bit .DEB packages downloadable too, in the
>>> future maybe. I think .DEB packages are very important to support, since
>>> Ubuntu is now one
Hi,
Daniël Mantione wrote:
>
> Op Tue, 29 Aug 2006, schreef Rob van der Linde:
>
>> [...]
>>
>> It would be nice to see 64 bit .DEB packages downloadable too, in the
>> future maybe. I think .DEB packages are very important to support, since
>> Ubuntu is now one of the top Linux distros.
>
> .d
Yeah I am aware you need a full Latex install, because I built Free
Pascal 2.0.2 about a month ago in Ubuntu Dapper (32-bit) myself, and put
the .deb files up on the Ubuntu forum for people to download. Even with
still fairly limited Linux knowledge I found it quite easy to build
however, even inst
Op Tue, 29 Aug 2006, schreef Rob van der Linde:
> Thank you very much, I was waiting for the release of 2.0.4 so I could
> compile .DEB packages for Ubuntu Dapper as I had previously compiled the
> 2.0.2 release for Ubuntu for people to download. I just found out that
> there are now official .D
Thank you very much, I was waiting for the release of 2.0.4 so I could
compile .DEB packages for Ubuntu Dapper as I had previously compiled the
2.0.2 release for Ubuntu for people to download. I just found out that
there are now official .DEB packages so it will no longer be necessary
for me to bui
Op Sat, 12 Aug 2006, schreef Alexander Todorov:
> Hello list,
> full logs from the arm-linux testing are available at:
> http://technobin.itafree.com/fpc/fpc_2.0.4_rc2_arm-linux_test.tar.bz2
>
> All binary files are deleted, only plain text left.
> Hope this will help FPC development.
Thanks a
Hello list,
full logs from the arm-linux testing are available at:
http://technobin.itafree.com/fpc/fpc_2.0.4_rc2_arm-linux_test.tar.bz2
All binary files are deleted, only plain text left.
Hope this will help FPC development.
Greetings to all.
___
fpc-
Hello,
thanks to all that helped me execute the tests.
These are the 3 digest files produced from testing
FPC 2.0.4 rc2 for arm-linux, using 2.0.4 rc3 tests.
Tested on x86(compile OK, all runs fail of course), qemu-arm, real arm device.
Will provide the full logs from the test if necessary.
dige
Peter Vreman wrote:
Here is the digest from the test:
The FPC being tested is ppcarm 2.0.4 rc2 from the ftp site. The test
suite is the 2.0.4 rc3 from svn.
Using qemu-arm emulator
`make TEST_FPC=/usr/local/lib/fpc/2.0.4/ppcarm TEST_OPT=-XParm-linux-
EMULATOR=qemu-arm clean all digest`
I tested
> Here is the digest from the test:
> The FPC being tested is ppcarm 2.0.4 rc2 from the ftp site. The test
> suite is the 2.0.4 rc3 from svn.
>
> Using qemu-arm emulator
> `make TEST_FPC=/usr/local/lib/fpc/2.0.4/ppcarm TEST_OPT=-XParm-linux-
> EMULATOR=qemu-arm clean all digest`
>
> I tested only t
Here is the digest from the test:
The FPC being tested is ppcarm 2.0.4 rc2 from the ftp site. The test
suite is the 2.0.4 rc3 from svn.
Using qemu-arm emulator
`make TEST_FPC=/usr/local/lib/fpc/2.0.4/ppcarm TEST_OPT=-XParm-linux-
EMULATOR=qemu-arm clean all digest`
---
> On 8/9/06, Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> TEST_OPT="..."
> Thanks again. I saw the options in the readme file.
>
> After running:
> make TEST_FPC=/usr/local/lib/fpc/2.0.4/ppcarm TEST_OPT=-XParm-linux-
> clean all digest
>
> in the fpc/tests directory it starts compiling for a while and
On 8/9/06, Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
TEST_OPT="..."
Thanks again. I saw the options in the readme file.
After running:
make TEST_FPC=/usr/local/lib/fpc/2.0.4/ppcarm TEST_OPT=-XParm-linux-
clean all digest
in the fpc/tests directory it starts compiling for a while and then
error oc
On 9 aug 2006, at 10:55, Alexander Todorov wrote:
No, TEST_FPC=/.../ must be appended because the test suite
distinguishes between
the compiler used to build the test tools like digest and the
compiler actually
being tested.
Thanks, I should have tried this.
Another question: How do I pas
On 8/9/06, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No, TEST_FPC=/.../ must be appended because the test suite distinguishes between
the compiler used to build the test tools like digest and the compiler actually
being tested.
Thanks, I should have tried this.
Another question: How do I pass
Daniël Mantione wrote:
Op Wed, 9 Aug 2006, schreef Alexander Todorov:
I downloaded the 2.0.4_rc3 source from svn and successfully build the
cros compiler.
According to wiki
(http://www.freepascal.org/wiki/index.php/How_to_start#Building_the_compiler)
this command have to build all tests and cr
Op Wed, 9 Aug 2006, schreef Alexander Todorov:
> I downloaded the 2.0.4_rc3 source from svn and successfully build the
> cros compiler.
> According to wiki
> (http://www.freepascal.org/wiki/index.php/How_to_start#Building_the_compiler)
> this command have to build all tests and create a digest o
On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 21:58 +0200, Martin Schreiber wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 August 2006 16.51, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 06:57 +0200, Martin Schreiber wrote:
> > > > > Did you fix Mantis 6898 in the meantime?
> > > >
> > > > You said that TBufDataset can use invalid poin
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 16.51, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 06:57 +0200, Martin Schreiber wrote:
> > > > Did you fix Mantis 6898 in the meantime?
> > >
> > > You said that TBufDataset can use invalid pointers, even if there
> > > wasn't any exception, if a dataset is opene
On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 06:57 +0200, Martin Schreiber wrote:
> > > Did you fix Mantis 6898 in the meantime?
> >
> > You said that TBufDataset can use invalid pointers, even if there wasn't
> > any exception, if a dataset is opened and closed more then once.
> >
> No, the problem is if here was a db e
On Tuesday 01 August 2006 23.00, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 22:13 +0200, Martin Schreiber wrote:
> > On Tuesday 18 July 2006 19.11, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> > > > MSE created some patches for fpc 2.0.4 rc1
> > > > to fix some widestring and db issues.
> > > > http://svn.
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 22:13 +0200, Martin Schreiber wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 July 2006 19.11, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> > > MSE created some patches for fpc 2.0.4 rc1
> > > to fix some widestring and db issues.
> > > http://svn.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.cgi/mseide-msegui/trunk/patch_fpc_2_0_
> > >4/
I would like to know what changed in sqldb from 2.0.2, to find out if
I could use a stand-still 2.0.4 instead of the always-moving 2.1.1
with Lazarus-from-svn.
2006/7/27, Tomas Hajny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 25 Jul 06, at 22:10, Alexander Todorov wrote:
> Hello,
> is it possible to include the f
On 25 Jul 06, at 22:10, Alexander Todorov wrote:
> Hello,
> is it possible to include the following information in the next
> releases changelog:
> 1) closed / fixed issues in mantis - issue number
> 2) the short description from mantis ?
>
> This way it will be very easy to see what has been fix
On Tuesday 18 July 2006 23.27, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 22:13 +0200, Martin Schreiber wrote:
> > On Tuesday 18 July 2006 19.11, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> > > > MSE created some patches for fpc 2.0.4 rc1
> > > > to fix some widestring and db issues.
> > > > http://svn.so
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 22:13 +0200, Martin Schreiber wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 July 2006 19.11, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> > > MSE created some patches for fpc 2.0.4 rc1
> > > to fix some widestring and db issues.
> > > http://svn.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.cgi/mseide-msegui/trunk/patch_fpc_2_0_
> > >4/
On Tuesday 18 July 2006 19.11, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> > MSE created some patches for fpc 2.0.4 rc1
> > to fix some widestring and db issues.
> > http://svn.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.cgi/mseide-msegui/trunk/patch_fpc_2_0_
> >4/
> >
> > I seems they are not applied to rc2.
> >
> > Can someone wit
>
> The db-files in fpc-2.0.4-rc2 are better up-to-date then the mse-one's.
> What's left is irrelevent, or in the fopen case, an ugly hack that
> shoudn't be there, imho.
>
> So for the db-part, nothing has to change.
thx for checking,
is someone :-) looking to implement/fix blob/text
in the my
> MSE created some patches for fpc 2.0.4 rc1
> to fix some widestring and db issues.
> http://svn.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.cgi/mseide-msegui/trunk/patch_fpc_2_0_4/
>
> I seems they are not applied to rc2.
>
> Can someone with widestring and db knowledge
> of fpc dev take a look at this?
The db
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Den Jean wrote:
Hi,
MSE created some patches for fpc 2.0.4 rc1
to fix some widestring and db issues.
http://svn.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.cgi/mseide-msegui/trunk/patch_fpc_2_0_4/
I seems they are not applied to rc2.
Can someone with widestring and db knowledge
of fpc dev
Den Jean wrote:
Hi,
> MSE created some patches for fpc 2.0.4 rc1
> to fix some widestring and db issues.
> http://svn.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.cgi/mseide-msegui/trunk/patch_fpc_2_0_4/
>
> I seems they are not applied to rc2.
.
.
Thanks for this information. There's been no decision made in the
Den Jean wrote:
> Hi,
>
> MSE created some patches for fpc 2.0.4 rc1
> to fix some widestring and db issues.
> http://svn.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.cgi/mseide-msegui/trunk/patch_fpc_2_0_4/
>
> I seems they are not applied to rc2.
>
> Can someone with widestring and db knowledge
> of fpc dev take
Just a little suggestion... I think we should inform any progress of FPC
development on the website. Maybe this has been informed through the Wiki, but I
believe not every visitor have time to look at the Wiki. Just like what Firebird
project does, they inform every RC on the website.
Just my
Hello,
As a follow-up to previous message sent by Jonas
(see below), I'd like to ask whether there's
anybody interested in testing of Win32 and
powerpc-linux versions, and at least one more
person for i386-linux.
Tomas
--- Forwarded message follows ---
To: FPC de
51 matches
Mail list logo
