Re: [fpc-devel] FPC 3.0.2 for SPARC

2017-05-08 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
On 06/05/17 06:30, Ozz Nixon wrote: (Personally): AWESOME! :-) The compiler etc. should be OK, the thing to really watch out for- particularly on Solaris- is which variant of binutils is being used (ditto for tar etc., particularly during installation). There's a Solaris page on the Wiki

Re: [fpc-devel] FPC 3.0.2 for SPARC

2017-05-08 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
On 08/05/17 14:00, Pierre Muller wrote: Le 05/05/2017 à 13:00, Mark Morgan Lloyd a écrit :> This is something that was discussed on the FPC-Pascal ML but it died.> > I am able to build installation bundles for SPARC running Linux (Debian) > and Solaris (OpenSXCE). The fp IDE works but doesn't

Re: [fpc-devel] FPC 3.0.2 for SPARC

2017-05-08 Thread Pierre Muller
Le 05/05/2017 à 13:00, Mark Morgan Lloyd a écrit : > This is something that was discussed on the FPC-Pascal ML but it died. > > I am able to build installation bundles for SPARC running Linux (Debian) > and Solaris (OpenSXCE). The fp IDE works but doesn't have libgdb > support, and I've got

Re: [fpc-devel] FPC 3.0.2 for SPARC

2017-05-08 Thread Pierre Muller
Le 07/05/2017 à 16:35, Mark Morgan Lloyd a écrit : > On 05/05/17 16:00, Pierre Muller wrote: > >> You probably need to add the -Xn option into the makepack script! > > Thanks for the pointer as to where it goes: those last words stopped me > spending days looking for the appropriate

Re: [fpc-devel] UTF-8 string literals

2017-05-08 Thread Martok
> That might be the one from Michael Schnell. Probably it should be marked with > a > big, fat warning that it's merely a user's suggestion and nothing official. Not even that. This one looks relatively obvious to me ;) I've filed a bug as for

Re: [fpc-devel] BacktraceStrFunc on linux x86_64?

2017-05-08 Thread Marco van de Voort
In our previous episode, Bernd Mueller said: > > Please test with the fixes branches. > > I tested yesterdays fixes branch and it worked for me now. Good. Most mass merging now have been done. Some dots-on-i and a rereading of various threads for unmerged requests still have to be done.

Re: [fpc-devel] BacktraceStrFunc on linux x86_64?

2017-05-08 Thread Bernd Mueller
On 05/01/2017 02:34 PM, Marco van de Voort wrote: In our previous episode, Bernd Mueller said: Only 3.0.2 linux for i386 CPU has the problem. 64-bit is OK. hmm, I don't get the lineinfo on x86-64 (Ubuntu 16.04/Mate, 64-Bit). armel and armhf are affected too. Please test with the fixes