On 2012-10-17 11:49, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
>
> So saying "if it won't compile with stable then sod off" isn't helpful.
That's definitely not how I meant for it to sound [the joys of email
conversations]. Reinier summed up my thoughts. Default behaviour is to
only allow last released FPC versio
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 2012-10-17 10:10, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Some slack would be desirable: stable is 2.6.0 but there are known
issues which are fixed by 2.6.1.
Nope, the FPC developers made the rules quite clear! Not even the fixes
branch is guaranteed to compile FPC Trunk. ONLY the
On 2012-10-17 10:15, Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
> See http://www.mail-archive.com//msg25868.html and the rest of
> the thread.
[embarrassed] Clearly my age is starting to show. :-) How do you find
this old messages in any case.
Your concern about cross-compiling could be an exception - FPC versio
On 2012-10-17 10:10, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
>
> Some slack would be desirable: stable is 2.6.0 but there are known
> issues which are fixed by 2.6.1.
Nope, the FPC developers made the rules quite clear! Not even the fixes
branch is guaranteed to compile FPC Trunk. ONLY the last released FPC is
Am Wednesday 17 October 2012 11:10:22 schrieb Mark Morgan Lloyd:
> Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> > On 2012-10-17 01:40, Frank Church wrote:
> >> As the solution doesn't seem to be too difficult which file or files can
> >> "we" zoom in on to fix it?
> >
> > Thanks for showing interest in this. I know
On 17 Oct 2012, at 10:53, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> The idea seems quite simple though. Do a `$compiler -iV` where $compiler
> is the starting compiler use to compile the FPC source code. If that
> version doesn't match a known "latest stable compiler version" constant,
> then report an error an
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 2012-10-17 01:40, Frank Church wrote:
As the solution doesn't seem to be too difficult which file or files can
"we" zoom in on to fix it?
Thanks for showing interest in this. I know near zero about Makefiles
and Makefile.fpc. I'm still a bit confused with FPC thoug
On 2012-10-17 01:40, Frank Church wrote:
>
> As the solution doesn't seem to be too difficult which file or files can
> "we" zoom in on to fix it?
Thanks for showing interest in this. I know near zero about Makefiles
and Makefile.fpc. I'm still a bit confused with FPC though. Does FPC now
use fp
On 16 October 2012 22:58, Rainer Stratmann wrote:
> Am Tuesday 16 October 2012 23:47:45 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
> > On 2012-10-16 22:37, Rainer Stratmann wrote:
> > > But that means work...
> >
> > And how much waisted time was spend by users "debugging the issue" and
> > by developers answerin
Am Tuesday 16 October 2012 23:47:45 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
> On 2012-10-16 22:37, Rainer Stratmann wrote:
> > But that means work...
>
> And how much waisted time was spend by users "debugging the issue" and
> by developers answering the same question over and over. As Marco said,
> this issue
On 2012-10-16 22:37, Rainer Stratmann wrote:
> But that means work...
And how much waisted time was spend by users "debugging the issue" and
by developers answering the same question over and over. As Marco said,
this issue has been around for years!
Programmers write code to reduce work, not mak
Am Tuesday 16 October 2012 23:21:51 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
> This will then hopefully reduce (or with some luck totally eliminate)
> this very popular support question.
I work like this.
I try to eliminate questions from the users.
In principle users of my progam only have to plug a USB Stick
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
> > [bold][font size=1][color=red][style=blink]
> > The starting compiler is only guaranteed [snip]
> > [/style][/color][/font][/bold]
>
> hehehe It is rather crazy how often this same problem occurs on the
> mailing list.
And how old
On 2012-10-16 22:01, Marco van de Voort wrote:
>
> [bold][font size=1][color=red][style=blink]
> The starting compiler is only guaranteed [snip]
> [/style][/color][/font][/bold]
hehehe It is rather crazy how often this same problem occurs on the
mailing list.
Just thinking out lou
I heard you the first time, don't worry. Just don't clown around so
much. It was a perfectly normal reply on your mail. I will do as you
proposed.
On 16 okt '12, mar...@stack.nl wrote:
> In our previous
episode, dhkblas...@zeelandnet.nl [1]said:
>
>> The starting compiler
is also from SVN
In our previous episode, dhkblas...@zeelandnet.nl said:
> The starting compiler is also from SVN (21955).
[bold][font size=1][color=red][style=blink]
The starting compiler is only guaranteed to work if it is the last release.
And only the last release, 2.6.0.
Anything else can break at any t
2012/10/16 :
> The starting compiler is also from SVN (21955).
> On 16 okt '12, mar...@stack.nl wrote:
>
> It should be 2.6.0, and nothing else.
Then the solution is simple, use fpc 2.6.0.
Vincent
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal
The starting compiler is also from SVN (21955).
On 16 okt '12,
mar...@stack.nl wrote:
> In our previous episode,
dhkblas...@zeelandnet.nl [1]said:
>
>> I am trying to update my FPC
from SVN, but for some reason I keep on getting a compilation error. The
last build was from 21955 (23rd July
In our previous episode, dhkblas...@zeelandnet.nl said:
>
> I am trying to update my FPC from SVN, but for some reason I
> keep on getting a compilation error. The last build was from 21955 (23rd
> July 2012). See below for the makefile output.
The crucial bit of information, the version of the
Hi,
I am trying to update my FPC from SVN, but for some reason I
keep on getting a compilation error. The last build was from 21955 (23rd
July 2012). See below for the makefile output.
Regards, Darius
C:lazarusfpctrunk>make all
make compiler_cycle RELEASE=1
make[1]:
Entering directory `C:
20 matches
Mail list logo
