Jonas:
> Anyway, you're right, the startup code for Linux/x86-64 does not
> pass the libc init/fini routines and hence is broken. And that's
> indeed not something to still change right before the release.
But perhaps you'll want to consider fpc-x86_64-cprt0.patch (attached)
for the trunk. I can
The Lazarus team is glad to announce the release of Lazarus 1.4.4.
This release was built with FPC 2.6.4, same as the previous
release Lazarus 1.4.2.
Here is the list of fixes for Lazarus 1.4.4:
http://wiki.freepascal.org/Lazarus_1.4_fixes_branch#Merged_revisions_for_1.4.4
Here is the list of ch
Edmund Grimley Evans wrote on Tue, 06 Oct 2015:
Jonas:
So x86_64 does this the wrong way.
No, with "x86" I meant "i386 and x86_64". Sorry for not being clear.
What you wrote was ambiguous, but I interpreted it as just 32-bit
because my aarch64 patch, above, makes rtl/linux/aarch64/cprt0.
Jonas:
>> So x86_64 does this the wrong way.
> No, with "x86" I meant "i386 and x86_64". Sorry for not being clear.
What you wrote was ambiguous, but I interpreted it as just 32-bit
because my aarch64 patch, above, makes rtl/linux/aarch64/cprt0.as more
similar to rtl/linux/x86_64/cprt0.as. Isn't
Edmund Grimley Evans wrote on Tue, 06 Oct 2015:
Jonas:
Now, for some reason, it seems that right now on Linux we only do this for
x86 and PowerPC (32 and 64 bit).
So x86_64 does this the wrong way.
No, with "x86" I meant "i386 and x86_64". Sorry for not being clear.
But it's a bit late
Jonas:
> Now, for some reason, it seems that right now on Linux we only do this for
> x86 and PowerPC (32 and 64 bit).
So x86_64 does this the wrong way. So perhaps I should try to fix this
on x86_64 (amd64) first because then there will be more people who can
test any proposed patch. But it's a
