Hallo, it's me again.
Bug is fixed with revision 9785
Hi there,
when cycling fpc on macosx/darwin-386 (10.5) I get this error:
i386.inc(1198,1) Error: Unknown label identifier .LPIC
with revision 9781/2. I tried 2.3.1 and 2.2.1
"call .LPic" is actually one line before the declaration of ".L
Hi there,
when cycling fpc on macosx/darwin-386 (10.5) I get this error:
i386.inc(1198,1) Error: Unknown label identifier .LPIC
with revision 9781/2. I tried 2.3.1 and 2.2.1
"call .LPic" is actually one line before the declaration of ".LPic".
My knowledge of asm is near zero. So, no idea whe
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 binary is
> > > > unstripped.
> > > >
>
> > > 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 (seem
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
> > >> Borlan
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 fur
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 so
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
B
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
Borland.
Anyone who writ
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
>
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.
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 - fpc-de
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.
>
>> 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 ma
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 th
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 B
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:
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.or
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:
http://groups.googl
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
http://lists.freepascal.
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.
_
20 matches
Mail list logo
