2) Configuration files (note that these may be fairly complex with
IFDEFs and include files.
So in Lazarus such an option could be just selecting a configuration file.
Seems rather easy.
-Michael
___
fpc-devel maillist -
2) asymmetrical (-Xs -g turns off stripping, but -g -Xs does not turn
off debug information ...
Do / should the order the options are given in matter ? IMHO this can be
the source of major confusion.
The Lazarus GUI uses check boxes to select compiler options. This no
order is
2) asymmetrical (-Xs -g turns off stripping, but -g -Xs does not turn
off debug information ...
Do / should the order the options are given in matter ? IMHO this can be
the source of major confusion.
The Lazarus GUI uses check boxes to select compiler options. This no
order is selectable
On 18 Jan 08, at 22:29, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Flávio Etrusco wrote:
That is partly true. The problem is that setting -Xs doesn't help if
there is also -g in the
command line. So people think that the compiler strips the
executable, but in fact the
On 19 Jan 2008, at 12:43, Tomas Hajny wrote:
On 18 Jan 08, at 22:29, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Flávio Etrusco wrote:
But why doesn't FPC spit a warning when these (seemingly
conflicting)
options are used?
It silently switches off -Xs when debug info is selected.
On 19 Jan 2008, at 13:22, Jonas Maebe wrote:
2) asymmetrical (-Xs -g, b: requires extra explanations and can be
unintuitive because the switches are sometimes orthogonal and
sometimes not
Something got left out here, that should have read:
2) asymmetrical (-Xs -g turns off stripping, but
Hi,
2008/1/18, Michael Schnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I think is really most important can use it ASAP.
Right ! See the latest posts in the Borland Kylix Newsgroup (that indeed
still exists :) ).
What do you mean? :|
--
Best regards...
Fabio Dell'Aria.
I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts because
the size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that
compiled by Borland.
-Michael
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
Hi,
2008/1/18, Michael Schnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts because
the size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that
compiled by Borland.
-Michael
I have found the original thread.
See it here:
On Jan 18, 2008 9:39 AM, Michael Schnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts because
the size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that
compiled by Borland.
So, he couldn't read the FAQ:
Hi,
2008/1/18, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Jan 18, 2008 9:39 AM, Michael Schnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts because
the size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that
compiled by Borland.
Op Fri, 18 Jan 2008, schreef Michael Schnell:
I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts because the
size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that compiled by
Borland.
Anyone who writes such texts doesn't look further than his nose.
Experience shows
I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts because the
size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that compiled by
Borland.
Anyone who writes such texts doesn't look further than his nose.
Experience shows they will just hit the next thing which makes
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Marc Weustink wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Peter Vreman wrote:
I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts because
the
size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that
compiled by
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Peter Vreman wrote:
I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts because the
size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that compiled
by
Borland.
Anyone who writes such texts doesn't look further than his nose.
Experience
So, he couldn't read the FAQ:
Of course not. Nearly nobody reads an FAQ before deciding if a program
is usable for him or not. They are only read when working with the
program and encountering problems.
-Michael
___
fpc-devel maillist -
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Peter Vreman wrote:
I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts because the
size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that compiled by
Borland.
Anyone who writes such texts doesn't look further than his nose.
On Jan 18, 2008 7:47 AM, Peter Vreman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts because the
size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that compiled
by
Borland.
Anyone who writes such texts doesn't look further than his
Daniël Mantione wrote:
Op Fri, 18 Jan 2008, schreef Marc Weustink:
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Peter Vreman wrote:
I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts
because the
size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that
compiled by
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Flávio Etrusco wrote:
On Jan 18, 2008 7:47 AM, Peter Vreman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts because the
size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that
compiled by
Borland.
Anyone
That is partly true. The problem is that setting -Xs doesn't help if
there is also -g in the
command line. So people think that the compiler strips the executable,
but in fact the binary is
unstripped.
But why doesn't FPC spit a warning when these (seemingly conflicting)
Op Fri, 18 Jan 2008, schreef Marc Weustink:
The FPC IDE has had it for years. All user interface support you need is
the Options-Mode menu. For the rest the handling all internal; the IDE
uses an array of options, one for each build mode, each with its own
defaults.
Yeah... and we want
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Fabio Dell'Aria wrote:
Hi,
2008/1/17, Peter Vreman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi to all,
I have some questions about the last 9778 revision (related to the new
-Xg option).
The help tell: -Xg now produces a .dbg file with debuginfo that can
be used by gdb.
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Fabio Dell'Aria wrote:
Hi,
2008/1/17, Michael Van Canneyt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Fabio Dell'Aria wrote:
Hi,
2008/1/17, Peter Vreman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi to all,
I have some questions about the last 9778 revision (related
Hi,
2008/1/17, Michael Van Canneyt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Fabio Dell'Aria wrote:
Hi,
2008/1/17, Peter Vreman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi to all,
I have some questions about the last 9778 revision (related to the new
-Xg option).
The help tell: -Xg now
Hi,
2008/1/17, Michael Van Canneyt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Fabio Dell'Aria wrote:
Hi,
2008/1/17, Michael Van Canneyt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Fabio Dell'Aria wrote:
Hi,
2008/1/17, Peter Vreman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi to all,
Hi,
2008/1/17, Peter Vreman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi to all,
I have some questions about the last 9778 revision (related to the new
-Xg option).
The help tell: -Xg now produces a .dbg file with debuginfo that can
be used by gdb.
My questions are:
1)...when this patch will be
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Fabio Dell'Aria wrote:
Because 2.2.2 is a bugfix only release, no new features are allowed.
Michael.
I understand and agree with this position, add a new features in a
bugfix only release is dangerous!
Any opinion about the 2.4 release date?
No.
Because of
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
My questions are:
1)...when this patch will be apply to the current 2.2.x version (I
think currently it works only on the last 2.3.x version)?
The patch is not even 24 hours old and needs to stabilize first. Maybe in a
couple of months it will be considered for
I think is really most important can use it ASAP.
Right ! See the latest posts in the Borland Kylix Newsgroup (that indeed
still exists :) ).
-Michael
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
30 matches
Mail list logo
