Re: [fpc-devel] patch testreport
On 8/13/06, Darius Blaszijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shure. I have added a format option --format=plain. This will output the
test for the console testapp as plain text. The problem however is that the
object TPlainResultsWriter will not be available for compilerversions before
VER2_1 (going from the info you gave me), so I need to hide
TPlainResultsWriter and the options for previous versions. That's all I want
to do. Is that ok?
I have the same issue... Chicken and Egg situation. Changes have been
added to FPCUnit after FPC 2.0.2, but I need them now in Lazarus. I
applied a few patches, but most of them I am holding off until after
the the FPC 2.0.4 release. I figured the IFDEF's will be getting ugly
in Lazarus, so only use the locally until 2.0.4.
Anyway, I did this in our local projects and then use the FPC202 or
FPC202OrAbove defines...
{$if defined(ver1) or (defined(ver2_0) and (fpc_patch2))}
{$fatal tiOPF2 requires at least FPC 2.0.2}
{$ELSEIF (defined(ver2_0) and (fpc_patch=2))}
{$DEFINE FPC202}
{$ELSE}
{$DEFINE FPC202OrAbove}
{$IFEND}
Regards,
- Graeme -
--
There's no place like 127.0.0.1
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] SymbianOS port
Jonas Maebe wrote: On 13 aug 2006, at 21:46, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: 1. Add symbian target to the compiler How exactly do I add symbian target to the compiler? I mean, which files should I start altering? compiler/system.pas, compiler/systems/i_symbian.pas, compiler/systems/t_symbian.pas In system.pas you mainly have to add an entry to the tsystem enum. You can use the other i_*/t_* files in the systems directory as example for the symbian files. Maybe the results of this thread can be added to http://www.freepascal.org/wiki/index.php/How_to_start or http://www.freepascal.org/wiki/index.php/FPC_internals ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] patch testreport
On 8/13/06, Darius Blaszijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have the same issue... Chicken and Egg situation. Changes have been
added to FPCUnit after FPC 2.0.2, but I need them now in Lazarus. I
applied a few patches, but most of them I am holding off until after
the the FPC 2.0.4 release. I figured the IFDEF's will be getting ugly
in Lazarus, so only use the locally until 2.0.4.
Anyway, I did this in our local projects and then use the FPC202 or
FPC202OrAbove defines...
{$if defined(ver1) or (defined(ver2_0) and (fpc_patch2))}
{$fatal tiOPF2 requires at least FPC 2.0.2}
{$ELSEIF (defined(ver2_0) and (fpc_patch=2))}
{$DEFINE FPC202}
{$ELSE}
{$DEFINE FPC202OrAbove}
{$IFEND}
Note that the ver1 check is afaik useless since ver1 doesn't support {$if
defined
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] What is the correct spelling of FPC
What is the correct spelling of FPC???
* FreePascal
* Free Pascal
* freepascal
The www.freepasal.org uses both spellings. In the web browser title
bar it is Free Pascal, but in the text heading it is freepascal,
etc... I am trying to get my documentation in order
My take:
The documentation uses a macro (see fpcdocs/fpc.sty)
\newcommand{\fpc}{Free Pascal\xspace}
The contraction freepascal is only for places where spaces are not desirable
(filenames, urls etc). I never saw much casing used in such usage, so I'd say
from your list the second is prefered for most usage, and the third for
urls/filenames by convention.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 23:08:29 +0200, Tomas Hajny wrote: Hello, I'd like to announce that the third (and hopefully last) release candidate for FPC 2.0.4 is available for download for most platforms (i386-linux, x86_64-linux, i386-win32, powerpc- macosx, i386-go32v2, arm-linux and powerpc- linux). You can download it from ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/beta/2.0.4-rc3/. i386-freebsd should be hopefully added in the following days. Please, let us know of any potential showstoppers before the next weekend (Saturday, August 20). Tomas Hello, I'm new to this list and my interests are in Lazarus under OS/2 and Linux and therefore by inference fpc. I tried to compile Lazarus with the last official fpc release, os2200 a couple of days ago, but that was too old. So, thanks for this rc which I have downloaded and built under OS/2. I'm still feeling my way around so I'm not sure that everything compiled that could be expected, but the compiler and many executables are there and work. I spotted one comment about GDB as the output scrolled past that said that debugging would be unavailable. Is this normal or a fault with my set up? Cheers, Dave ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] $IF issues
Looking at the code below...
{$if defined(ver2_0)}
{$note This is not delphi compatible. }
{$endif}
Is this a feature or a FPC bug? FPC allows the $IF to be closed with
the $ENDIF as well as the $IFEND. This is not Delphi compatible.
The closing tag for $IF is $IFEND
The closing tag for $IFDEF is $ENDIF
Feature.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
Tomas Hajny schreef: Hello, I'd like to announce that the third (and hopefully last) release candidate for FPC 2.0.4 is available for download for most platforms (i386-linux, x86_64-linux, i386-win32, powerpc- macosx, i386-go32v2, arm-linux and powerpc- linux). You can download it from ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/beta/2.0.4-rc3/. i386-freebsd should be hopefully added in the following days. Please, let us know of any potential showstoppers before the next weekend (Saturday, August 20). Most of the lazarus snapshots are built with fpc 2.0.4-rc3 too. For download locations of those test builds, see http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/Lazarus_Snapshots_Downloads Vincent ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] $IF issues
Op Mon, 14 Aug 2006, schreef Graeme Geldenhuys: On 8/14/06, Peter Vreman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this a feature or a FPC bug? FPC allows the $IF to be closed with the $ENDIF as well as the $IFEND. This is not Delphi compatible. The closing tag for $IF is $IFEND The closing tag for $IFDEF is $ENDIF As I read it, $IF/$IFEND was added to Delphi in Delphi 6. FPC supports this construction much longer, I think since the 0.9.x series. The FPC way has always been to use $ENDIF and FPC will of course not break compatibility with itself. Go ask Borland why they wanted to be FPC incompatible :) Feature. Maybe this should be controlled by the compiler mode? Delphi vs ObjFPC. Or should we leave it up to the developer to remember which one to use when writing code to be compiled with Delphi and FPC? You could make it dependent on the compiler mode, but I don't see the point, any Delphi code will still compile. Daniël___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] $IF issues
On 8/14/06, Vincent Snijders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You miss the point: Delphi compatibility mode is for people who develop for FPC, but want to compile occasionally in Delphi. In the current situation they are not aware of this weakness of Delphi (no support of $ENDIF for $IF), until they compile in Delphi. That is exactly what happened. I only develop under FPC, but contribute a lot to the tiOPF project, which is mostly used by Delphi developers. I broke the Delphi builds by adding the $IF..$ENDIF code. The tiOPF project uses the Delphi Mode for the FPC compiler, and I was surprised when notified of the problem. But maybe Graeme should make a Delphi feature request too (and see which is honoured first) :-) Where do I go, to ask for such a feature in Borland Delphi? I guess it would take years to materialize. :-) Borland is not as pro-active as the FPC maintainers!! Regards, Graeme. -- There's no place like 127.0.0.1 ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] $IF issues
Op Mon, 14 Aug 2006, schreef Vincent Snijders: You miss the point: Delphi compatibility mode is for people who develop for FPC, but want to compile occasionally in Delphi. It can be used that way, but its main purpose is to support Delphi constructions that we consider broken and therefore do not want in objpas mode. To write new code that is compilable by both FPC and Delphi, Objpas mode should suit as well as Delphi mode. In the current situation they are not aware of this weakness of Delphi (no support of $ENDIF for $IF), until they compile in Delphi. But maybe Graeme should make a Delphi feature request too (and see which is honoured first) :-) In all modes a significant portion of FPC functionality is still enabled; the modes not designed with this goal in mind. It will always be possible to write code in FPC that Delphi doesn't accept; for example there exists no sane way you can prevent people from using FPC specific features in the RTL. Daniël___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] $IF issues
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Daniël Mantione wrote: Op Mon, 14 Aug 2006, schreef Vincent Snijders: You miss the point: Delphi compatibility mode is for people who develop for FPC, but want to compile occasionally in Delphi. It can be used that way, but its main purpose is to support Delphi constructions that we consider broken and therefore do not want in objpas mode. To write new code that is compilable by both FPC and Delphi, Objpas mode should suit as well as Delphi mode. This is not quite correct: Think of e.g. the @Method issue. And the Delphi/TP modes are designed to be as Delphi/TP compatible as possible. Michael.___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] $IF issues
On 8/14/06, Daniël Mantione [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: mode. To write new code that is compilable by both FPC and Delphi, Objpas mode should suit as well as Delphi mode. Not quite! The project I am working on (tiOPF) is mainly used by Delphi developers, as I mentioned before. My first thought was to use tiOPF with FPC in compiler mode ObjFPC. I had to add over a hundred IFDEF's for all the @ProcedureName assignments. A few months later, the Delphi delevelopers got sick of all the IFDEF's in the code. I changed the FPC compiler mode to Delphi and could remove all those IFDEF's with the @ sign. That is just one such difference in the compiler modes. Regards, - Graeme - -- There's no place like 127.0.0.1 ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: AW: AW: AW: [fpc-devel] MemoryLeak with AS Operator
On 14 aug 2006, at 13:06, Helmut Hartl wrote: If memory is acquired through: Getmem(x,size) and Freed through Freemem(x,size) I have a leak because Getmem reserves occasionally more mem as specified in size? No. Well, it will round up all allocations to a multiple of X bytes (X depends on whether you're on a 32 or 64 bit platform), but the same happens when freeing. If you free with a wrong size, you get a run time error 204. Is Getmem(x,size) Freemem(x) correct? Yes. Is valgrind support broken or do I have to do something beyond setting the valgrind compiler switch? You don't have to do anything but compile all your program's units and the program itself with the -gv switch. Jonas ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 11:23:28 +0200 (Romance Daylight Time), Michael Van Canneyt wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Dave Parsons wrote: So, thanks for this rc which I have downloaded and built under OS/2. I'm still feeling my way around so I'm not sure that everything compiled that could be expected, but the compiler and many executables are there and work. I spotted one comment about GDB as the output scrolled past that said that debugging would be unavailable. Is this normal or a fault with my set up? You must compile with debug information included for gdb to work, you should set this option explicitly. Thanks, I'll try that later. Cheers, Dave ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 11:39:29 +0200, Vincent Snijders wrote: Most of the lazarus snapshots are built with fpc 2.0.4-rc3 too. For download locations of those test builds, see http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/Lazarus_Snapshots_Downloads Hi, Thanks, I downloaded the source for 0.9.16 on Saturday and I would like to try a prebuilt binary under Linux but I haven't been able to reach the site since. The ftp site times out and www.lazarus.freepascal.org returns 'Session initialisation failed'. This is with Seamonkey under both OS/2 and Linux. Ah, the mirrors on the Wiki work. Downloading now thanks. Cheers, Dave ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: AW: AW: AW: [fpc-devel] MemoryLeak with AS Operator
Jonas Maebe schreef: On 14 aug 2006, at 13:06, Helmut Hartl wrote: Is valgrind support broken or do I have to do something beyond setting the valgrind compiler switch? You don't have to do anything but compile all your program's units and the program itself with the -gv switch. Note: all includes the RTL. Vincent ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
Dave Parsons wrote: On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 23:08:29 +0200, Tomas Hajny wrote: Hello Dave, I'd like to announce that the third (and hopefully last) release candidate for FPC 2.0.4 is available for download for most platforms (i386-linux, x86_64-linux, i386-win32, powerpc- macosx, i386-go32v2, arm-linux and powerpc- linux). You can download it from ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/beta/2.0.4-rc3/. i386-freebsd should be hopefully added in the following days. Please, let us know of any potential showstoppers before the next weekend (Saturday, August 20). Hello, I'm new to this list and my interests are in Lazarus under OS/2 and Linux and therefore by inference fpc. Lazarus under OS/2? Well, this would still take some time, I guess... Are you planning to work on OS/2 support in Lazarus, or just interested to see it? I tried to compile Lazarus with the last official fpc release, os2200 a couple of days ago, but that was too old. So, thanks for this rc which I have downloaded and built under OS/2. Are you talking about compilation of FPC 2.0.4-rc3 sources under OS/2? OS/2 binaries of 2.0.4-rc2 were uploaded by me earlier. However, I got a SIGSEGV while trying to build rc3. I already had this in the past and it unfortunately largely depends on the exact environment (so e.g. it cannot be reproduced any more if compiling with debug information included :-((( ). I'm still feeling my way around so I'm not sure that everything compiled that could be expected, but the compiler and many executables are there and work. I spotted one comment about GDB as the output scrolled past that said that debugging would be unavailable. Is this normal or a fault with my set up? Well, I guess this refers to IDE compilation. Unfortunately, the OS/2 version of GDB is based on ancient 4.16 sources and nobody managed to create libgdb.a which could be in turn used for including debugging support in our IDE. You can still debug with standalone GDB or the PMGDB add-on (both distributed with FPC too). BTW, I didn't include IDE (fp.exe) in RC1 and RC2 because it was crashing somewhere in the thunking code inside the EMX libraries (emxwrap.dll or emx.dll) while calling VioShowBuf (it worked correctly in the past, so I'm not sure what exactly happened there :-( ). I'd be interested to know whether your experience is different. Tomas ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: AW: AW: AW: [fpc-devel] MemoryLeak with AS Operator
On 14 aug 2006, at 13:14, Vincent Snijders wrote: Is valgrind support broken or do I have to do something beyond setting the valgrind compiler switch? You don't have to do anything but compile all your program's units and the program itself with the -gv switch. Note: all includes the RTL. No, an RTL compiled without debugging information is also fine. What's important is that you don't have any units compiled with debugging info, but without the -gv set (because Valgrind cannot handle some kinds of debugging info we generate, and -gv works around that). Jonas ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] $IF issues
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: On 8/14/06, Vincent Snijders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You miss the point: Delphi compatibility mode is for people who develop for FPC, but want to compile occasionally in Delphi. In the current situation they are not aware of this weakness of Delphi (no support of $ENDIF for $IF), until they compile in Delphi. That is exactly what happened. I only develop under FPC, but contribute a lot to the tiOPF project, which is mostly used by Delphi developers. I broke the Delphi builds by adding the $IF..$ENDIF code. The tiOPF project uses the Delphi Mode for the FPC compiler, and I was surprised when notified of the problem. Well, the delphi mode is made to compile delphi programs with fpc not to check your programs for delphi compliance ;) But maybe Graeme should make a Delphi feature request too (and see which is honoured first) :-) Where do I go, to ask for such a feature in Borland Delphi? I guess it would take years to materialize. :-) Borland is not as pro-active as the FPC maintainers!! Regards, Graeme. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 13:15:51 +0200 (CEST), Tomas Hajny wrote: Hello Tomas, Dave Parsons wrote: On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 23:08:29 +0200, Tomas Hajny wrote: Hello Dave, I'm new to this list and my interests are in Lazarus under OS/2 and Linux and therefore by inference fpc. Lazarus under OS/2? Well, this would still take some time, I guess... Are you planning to work on OS/2 support in Lazarus, or just interested to see it? My primary interest I guess is a replacement for Kylix under Linux but I would also like to be able to use Lazarus under OS/2 and OpenVMS, so first of all I want to find out how far the project has come on these three platforms. Especially important is whether Lazarus can compile an existing program which I now maintain using Delphi 2005 on MSW and Kylix on Linux. It currently uses Indy9 for networking in a large LAN with Solaris and OpenVMS end users. This is a mature program, started 13 years ago in Turbo Pascal, in daily use by others and continually evolving to meet new requirements. I realize that OS/2 and OpenVMS are fringe operating systems so I expect to have to do some development of both fpc Lazarus there myself, the question is really how much work i.e. time is required. To help me, I would like to know for instance how to bootstrap fpc on a new platform. What is the original compiler? Any form of Pascal compiler, gcc or whatever. How dependent on fpc is Lazarus? From what I have read, Lazarus uses Gtk as its widget set. Gtk 1.2.10 is available on OpenVMS and a Gtk 2 has been spoken about - one day perhaps. Same applies to OS/2. Is Gtk2 essential? I tried to compile Lazarus with the last official fpc release, os2200 a couple of days ago, but that was too old. So, thanks for this rc which I have downloaded and built under OS/2. Are you talking about compilation of FPC 2.0.4-rc3 sources under OS/2? OS/2 binaries of 2.0.4-rc2 were uploaded by me earlier. However, I got a SIGSEGV while trying to build rc3. I already had this in the past and it unfortunately largely depends on the exact environment (so e.g. it cannot be reproduced any more if compiling with debug information included :-((( ). Yes I just downloaded fpcbuild-2.0.4-rc3.tar.gz, extracted the tar using untgz, ( untgz failed to completely unpack it ) untarred it with gnu tar and ran 'make os2' using the fpc from os2200.zip which was the latest I could find. After that it installed with 'make install'. The only error I saw was the one about gdb. I'm still feeling my way around so I'm not sure that everything compiled that could be expected, but the compiler and many executables are there and work. I spotted one comment about GDB as the output scrolled past that said that debugging would be unavailable. Is this normal or a fault with my set up? Well, I guess this refers to IDE compilation. Unfortunately, the OS/2 version of GDB is based on ancient 4.16 sources and nobody managed to create libgdb.a which could be in turn used for including debugging support in our IDE. You can still debug with standalone GDB or the PMGDB add-on (both distributed with FPC too). BTW, I didn't include IDE (fp.exe) in RC1 and RC2 because it was crashing somewhere in the thunking code inside the EMX libraries (emxwrap.dll or emx.dll) while calling VioShowBuf (it worked correctly in the past, so I'm not sure what exactly happened there :-( ). I'd be interested to know whether your experience is different. That sounds about right. Re above and compilers, I did notice the EMX libs there, what are they used for as etc., or is gcc involved somewhere. If it is have you had a look at the Innotek builds, currently gcc-3.3.5 csd1. I haven't used gdb much but I understand that the newer gccs from Innotek are not compatible with the gdb we currently have. This is of course a concern since the debugger is one of the main strengths of a good IDE. Cheers, Dave ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
I realize that OS/2 and OpenVMS are fringe operating systems so I expect to have to do some development of both fpc Lazarus there myself, the question is really how much work i.e. time is required. To help me, I would like to know for instance how to bootstrap fpc on a new platform. What is the original compiler? Any form of Pascal compiler, gcc or whatever. How dependent on fpc is Lazarus? OpenVMS runs on Alpha or Itaniums and we don't have a code generator for those. Also OpenVMS is very strange wrt file and disk handling. That makes a port not easy. To bootstrap FPC you need FPC :-) And you need GNU (cross)binutils for the target platform (or code an internal assembler and linker). ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
On 14 aug 2006, at 17:44, Peter Vreman wrote: And you need GNU (cross)binutils for the target platform Or you can compile to assembler code, copy all assembler files and the linker script to the target machine and assemble/link there (which is what I always do). Jonas ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
Jonas Maebe wrote: On 14 aug 2006, at 17:44, Peter Vreman wrote: And you need GNU (cross)binutils for the target platform Or you can compile to assembler code, copy all assembler files and the linker script to the target machine and assemble/link there (which is what I always do). That's 1.x times technology :) ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
Dave Parsons wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 13:15:51 +0200 (CEST), Tomas Hajny wrote: Dave Parsons wrote: On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 23:08:29 +0200, Tomas Hajny wrote: . . I realize that OS/2 and OpenVMS are fringe operating systems so I expect to have to do some development of both fpc Lazarus there myself, the question is really how much work i.e. time is required. To help me, I would like to know for instance how to bootstrap fpc on a new platform. What is the original compiler? Any form of Pascal compiler, gcc or whatever. How dependent on fpc is Lazarus? Lazarus is fully dependent on FPC in the sense that it's FPC which is used for all compilation. From what I have read, Lazarus uses Gtk as its widget set. Gtk 1.2.10 is available on OpenVMS and a Gtk 2 has been spoken about - one day perhaps. Same applies to OS/2. Is Gtk2 essential? GTK availability on OS/2 is little bit problematic at the moment - as far as I know, the only available version needs to have X Window libraries available (e.g. using XFree86/2 installation). There's no native port available (meaning a port based on native GUI functions provided directly by OS/2). As you might know, XFree86/2 basically provides another desktop running in full-screen, i.e. separated from native OS/2 apps, etc. There's a project supposed to provide X Window libraries allowing to use usual GUI windows (i.e. running on the usual OS/2 desktop), but I'm not sure whether it's in useable state already. I tried to compile Lazarus with the last official fpc release, os2200 a couple of days ago, but that was too old. So, thanks for this rc which I have downloaded and built under OS/2. Are you talking about compilation of FPC 2.0.4-rc3 sources under OS/2? OS/2 binaries of 2.0.4-rc2 were uploaded by me earlier. However, I got a SIGSEGV while trying to build rc3. I already had this in the past and it unfortunately largely depends on the exact environment (so e.g. it cannot be reproduced any more if compiling with debug information included :-((( ). Yes I just downloaded fpcbuild-2.0.4-rc3.tar.gz, extracted the tar using untgz, ( untgz failed to completely unpack it ) untarred it with gnu tar and ran 'make os2' using the fpc from os2200.zip which was the latest I could find. After that it installed with 'make install'. The only error I saw was the one about gdb. Right - different make options resulting in correct compilation... I'm still feeling my way around so I'm not sure that everything compiled that could be expected, but the compiler and many executables are there and work. I spotted one comment about GDB as the output scrolled past that said that debugging would be unavailable. Is this normal or a fault with my set up? Well, I guess this refers to IDE compilation. Unfortunately, the OS/2 version of GDB is based on ancient 4.16 sources and nobody managed to create libgdb.a which could be in turn used for including debugging support in our IDE. You can still debug with standalone GDB or the PMGDB add-on (both distributed with FPC too). BTW, I didn't include IDE (fp.exe) in RC1 and RC2 because it was crashing somewhere in the thunking code inside the EMX libraries (emxwrap.dll or emx.dll) while calling VioShowBuf (it worked correctly in the past, so I'm not sure what exactly happened there :-( ). I'd be interested to know whether your experience is different. That sounds about right. Re above and compilers, I did notice the EMX libs there, what are they used for as etc., or is gcc involved somewhere. GCC isn't involved at all. We use the following GNU stuff at the moment: 1) binutils (as.exe and ld.exe). as.exe is available in new versions too, ld.exe not really as far as I know. Newer versions of as.exe (distributed with Innotek GCC builds) are dynamically linked to libcXXX.dll and two other libs (e.g. bfd2e.dll and iintl6i.dll). 2) Existing (ancient) ld.exe for OS/2 can only produce (modified) a.out format executables, and this format is supported by the existing (equally ancient) GDB (plus the GUI wrapper PMGDB). This format implies always having EMX.DLL linked in (performed automatically by ld.exe). In addition to this, helper routine used to allow access to HW ports (unit ports) is used as well. 3) EMXWRAP.DLL is a wrapper library for calling console 16-bit OS/2 API functions in KBDCALLS.DLL, MOUCALLS.DLL and VIOCALLS.DLL (text mode console access as used in our text-mode IDE - keyboard, mouse and video). The following alternatives would be possible: 1) FPC already has internal assembler and linker, but these don't support the OS/2 target at the moment. Changing the assembler part to support output of a.out object files wouldn't make much sense, so you'd basically need to change both sides in parallel (although you could possibly use a different external linker in the first phase, like LINK386.EXE distributed with OS/2 or Watcom linker). Alternatively, it might be possible to switch to
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
On 14 Aug 2006, at 18:31, Florian Klaempfl wrote: Or you can compile to assembler code, copy all assembler files and the linker script to the target machine and assemble/link there (which is what I always do). That's 1.x times technology :) But very fast and much less work than even just downloading and installing cross binutils (let alone compiling them). That's the case for me at least... Jonas ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
Jonas Maebe wrote: On 14 Aug 2006, at 18:31, Florian Klaempfl wrote: Or you can compile to assembler code, copy all assembler files and the linker script to the target machine and assemble/link there (which is what I always do). That's 1.x times technology :) But very fast and much less work than even just downloading and installing cross binutils (let alone compiling them). That's the case for me at least... Well, if you do it only once yes ;) ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
Jonas Maebe wrote: On 14 aug 2006, at 17:44, Peter Vreman wrote: And you need GNU (cross)binutils for the target platform Or you can compile to assembler code, copy all assembler files and the linker script to the target machine and assemble/link there (which is what I always do). That's 1.x times technology :) I also do it like Jonas usually. If only because generally I've to do several alter-link-run cycli when creating prt0.as, and then it would spare me a bunch of copy-binary-to-target operations. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 18:01:10 +0200, Jonas Maebe wrote: On 14 aug 2006, at 17:44, Peter Vreman wrote: And you need GNU (cross)binutils for the target platform Or you can compile to assembler code, copy all assembler files and the linker script to the target machine and assemble/link there (which is what I always do). Well, it should be possible then but are you really saying that the original FPC was all written in assembler? Dave ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 2.0.4-rc3 available
On 14 Aug 2006, at 18:28, Dave Parsons wrote: Well, it should be possible then but are you really saying that the original FPC was all written in assembler? No, the original FPC was written in Turbo Pascal (i.e., for Dos/16 bit). From there the cross compilation to Dos/32 bit assembler, OS/2, Linux and later other platforms started. By now, FPC is only compilable by itself. Jonas ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
