On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:29:40 +0200 "Tomas Hajny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 19 Oct 07, at 13:14, Micha Nelissen wrote: > > Jonas Maebe wrote: > > > This is not true. You can perfectly compile a compiler using the > > > previous' release rtl. > > > > Sure this is not the question. > > > > > E.g. the people developing using the fp IDE often > > > do this (because they have a project for the compiler, but that > > > one does not automatically compile the rtl). > > > > Adapt the project to use the new RTL ? Anyway, seems "dangerous" to > > me, not testing possible RTL regressions then. > > > > > A while ago, Peter removed several > > > dependencies of the compiler on the new rtl (related to endian > > > swapping routines) for this reason. > > > > I see the reason is not really coming out, but I'll stop now. > > Well, I'd certainly have one (more) reason not to > put it into RTL - I don't think that support for > .ppu file format is something so general and > commonly used by (Free) Pascal programmers that > it should become part of our RTL. And another: A lazarus built with fpc 2.0.4 should be able to read the ppu of 2.3.x. Even though the ppu format is very stable, it is not carved in stone. So, maybe it would be best to keep a working copy of the ppu reader unit in the lazarus svn and give it a distinct name? Mattias _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
