5
To:
Reply-To: FPC-Pascal users discussions
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: 2.6.0 for Solaris? And other questions [one
resolved]
microc...@zoho.com wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2012 10:29:28 +0200 Sven Barth
> wrote:
>
>> This might be, because you compiled it without a lib
microc...@zoho.com wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2012 10:29:28 +0200 Sven Barth
wrote:
This might be, because you compiled it without a libgdb which in turn is
the one who links dynamically to libc. Most FPC applications (if they
don't use threads or a WideString manager) don't require libc and thus
d
On Tue, 22 May 2012 10:29:28 +0200 Sven Barth
wrote:
> This might be, because you compiled it without a libgdb which in turn is
> the one who links dynamically to libc. Most FPC applications (if they
> don't use threads or a WideString manager) don't require libc and thus
> don't need to link to
Am 21.05.2012 14:59, schrieb microc...@zoho.com:
On Wed, 9 May 2012 17:40:40 +0200 (CEST) "Tomas Hajny" wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 16:14, microcode wrote:
Another question is on 2.6.0 on Linux. I cannot run the fp ide because
I ave glibc 2.9. The error message I get says
fp: /lib64/libc.so.6
Am 11.05.2012 11:29, schrieb microc...@zoho.com:
On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:14:45 + Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
You might find the fpc-devel mailing list interesting, although I think
that everybody would admit that there is a shortage of documentation for
the entrails of the compiler.
Thanks, I
microc...@zoho.com wrote:
On Thu, 10 May 2012 14:07:47 +0200 (CEST) "Tomas Hajny" wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2012 13:22, microcode wrote:
Sun makes awfully nice boxes and Solaris is a very nice development
platform. I hope the guys will keep FPC going on Solaris. There are
many Solaris 10 on Sun
On Thu, May 10, 2012 15:20, microc...@zoho.com wrote:
> On Thu, 10 May 2012 14:07:47 +0200 (CEST) "Tomas Hajny" wrote:
>> On Thu, May 10, 2012 13:22, microcode wrote:
>
>> > Sun makes awfully nice boxes and Solaris is a very nice development
>> > platform. I hope the guys will keep FPC going on Sol
On Thu, May 10, 2012 13:22, microc...@zoho.com wrote:
.
.
> Sun makes awfully nice boxes and Solaris is a very nice development
> platform. I hope the guys will keep FPC going on Solaris. There are many
> Solaris 10 on Sun fans.
.
.
FPC support of individual platforms depends on availability o
On Thu, May 10, 2012 08:45, Sven Barth wrote:
> Am 09.05.2012 20:19, schrieb microc...@zoho.com:
There are no binaries provided by my distribution. It's Slackware! But
the question was, was it really necessary to use such a recent glibc?
>>
>>> It's a matter of what the libc version happe
Sven Barth wrote:
Am 09.05.2012 20:19, schrieb microc...@zoho.com:
There are no binaries provided by my distribution. It's Slackware! But
the question was, was it really necessary to use such a recent glibc?
It's a matter of what the libc version happens to be on the system that
was used to b
microc...@zoho.com wrote:
I screwed up the quoting here, sorry. Jeff didn't write all below, I think
some of it was Mark.
On Wed, 09 May 2012 18:01:43 -0400 Jeff Wormsley wrote:
And what, pray, is wrong with Slackware? :-)
Nothing :-) Once you Slack you never go back!
Most of the SPARC syst
microc...@zoho.com wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2012 18:18:59 + Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
My main role is being a thorn in the side of the core developers when
something stops working :-) However I've previously offered to host a
(not very fast) system here for compilation etc., and the offer stand
Am 09.05.2012 20:19, schrieb microc...@zoho.com:
There are no binaries provided by my distribution. It's Slackware! But
the question was, was it really necessary to use such a recent glibc?
It's a matter of what the libc version happens to be on the system that
was used to build libgdb, which
Ludo Brands wrote:
Your question, as given unambiguously in the subject line, relates to
2.6.0. I'm telling you, equally unambiguously, that you don't
want to do
that. You might need to start off with an older binary to get
yourself
going, or you might be able to get hold of a binary for 2.6.
>
> Your question, as given unambiguously in the subject line, relates to
> 2.6.0. I'm telling you, equally unambiguously, that you don't
> want to do
> that. You might need to start off with an older binary to get
> yourself
> going, or you might be able to get hold of a binary for 2.6.0, bu
microc...@zoho.com wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2012 16:10:06 + Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
There is a directory for Solaris SPARC but it is empty. Is it possible
to get 2.6.0 for Solaris SPARC? Thanks again.
I've got a copy that I've built and run here, but I started off with an
earlier version a
16 matches
Mail list logo
