Re: [fpc-devel] FPC 3.0.0-rc1 release
On Thu, August 27, 2015 15:03, Frank Grotelueschen wrote: At 10:42 26.08.2015, Florian Klaempfl wrote: Am 26.08.2015 um 08:45 schrieb Marco van de Voort: .. Yup, and remove w2k and NT(4) too. While they might work, they are no longer formally supported and tested afaik. Question is: if the first is the target system and the latter the host system? Please don't stop support for W2K. It was the first 'full useable' Windows based on NT-Kernel and is still used today. I don't think that the Win32 target maintainers would want to break working under W2K on purpose, but it's difficult to guarantee support for such a version if it isn't used and tested by the respective FPC developers regularly. On the other hand, anyone interested in support for such a version may decide to keep testing the trunk version and report any possible issues as soon as they arise, so that possible options for resolution may be discussed. Tomas ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] FPC 3.0.0-rc1 release
At 10:42 26.08.2015, Florian Klaempfl wrote: Am 26.08.2015 um 08:45 schrieb Marco van de Voort: .. Yup, and remove w2k and NT(4) too. While they might work, they are no longer formally supported and tested afaik. Question is: if the first is the target system and the latter the host system? Please don't stop support for W2K. It was the first 'full useable' Windows based on NT-Kernel and is still used today. Frank ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] FPC 3.0.0-rc1 release
Tomas Hajny wrote: On Thu, August 27, 2015 15:03, Frank Grotelueschen wrote: Please don't stop support for W2K. It was the first 'full useable' Windows based on NT-Kernel and is still used today. I don't think that the Win32 target maintainers would want to break working under W2K on purpose, but it's difficult to guarantee support for such a version if it isn't used and tested by the respective FPC developers regularly. On the other hand, anyone interested in support for such a version may decide to keep testing the trunk version and report any possible issues as soon as they arise, so that possible options for resolution may be discussed. I still have a few NT4 app servers, and a very small number of W2K systems. There are definite issues relating to Unicode support on NT4 which /could/ be fixed, but are probably not worth the effort since the NT4 APIs were basically not fully implemented by Microsoft. The bottom line with both NT4 and W2K is that ancillary software like installation programs are no longer viable. -- Mark Morgan Lloyd markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues] ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
[fpc-devel] RTTI
Thanks for making the changes to the RTTI branch ! However, this branch does not compile, unless the following files are added ! compiler\owomflib.pas packages\mysql\src\mysql57dyn.pp packages\winunits-base\src\shlwapi.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\httpprotocol.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\cgiprotocol.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\fpwebclient.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\fpjwt.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\fpoauth2.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\fpoauth2ini.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\fphttpwebclient.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\restbase.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\restcodegen.pp With these files, compiling is ok. Running tests i386 (Win8.1). Testing the RTTI features reveals a small difference between the old and the new RTTI version. All other RTTI features still work and also work as expected ! Again, tested i386 on Win8.1 procedure A2(const A: TIntegerArray); Previous stack size: 4. New stack size: 0. Previous ParReg: 255. New ParReg: 1. These two were the only differences on i386 with the new RTTI ! ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] FPC 3.0.0-rc1 release
In our previous episode, Mark Morgan Lloyd said: I still have a few NT4 app servers, and a very small number of W2K systems. Possession That's not the important question, rather how much new software do you develop for those? ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] RTTI
Am 27.08.2015 um 15:23 schrieb Alfred: Thanks for making the changes to the RTTI branch ! However, this branch does not compile, unless the following files are added ! compiler\owomflib.pas packages\mysql\src\mysql57dyn.pp packages\winunits-base\src\shlwapi.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\httpprotocol.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\cgiprotocol.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\fpwebclient.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\fpjwt.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\fpoauth2.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\fpoauth2ini.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\fphttpwebclient.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\restbase.pp packages\fcl-web\src\base\restcodegen.pp With these files, compiling is ok. I'm a bit confused as to why some files went missing. I will look into this issue. Running tests i386 (Win8.1). Testing the RTTI features reveals a small difference between the old and the new RTTI version. All other RTTI features still work and also work as expected ! Again, tested i386 on Win8.1 procedure A2(const A: TIntegerArray); Previous stack size: 4. New stack size: 0. Previous ParReg: 255. New ParReg: 1. These two were the only differences on i386 with the new RTTI ! I changed nothing concerning the code generating the actual information, since they are only derived from information already available during the compiler run. Seems like FPC now handles this diffrent. Is this compatible with delphi? If this is a problem at all, what calling convention was used? msf Steve ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] FPC 3.0.0-rc1 release
Marco van de Voort wrote: In our previous episode, Mark Morgan Lloyd said: I still have a few NT4 app servers, and a very small number of W2K systems. Possession That's not the important question, rather how much new software do you develop for those? I'd not expect to ship anything externally, since we run stuff here as a service to our customers. If I moved an app from Delphi to Lazarus and it didn't run on NT4, it would be unfortunate that I couldn't do a direct comparison but in view of the OS's age hardly surprising. If I couldn't run an app on W2K I'd be slightly less happy, because as I understand it that is the last version of Windows which doesn't need to be registered/unlocked. Our preferred target is unix, but there are some things which the windowing architecture of Windows make easier. -- Mark Morgan Lloyd markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues] ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
