On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> 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. It's built so that a newer version can always read an older PPU file and vice versa: an old ppu unit can read a newer file, but just doesn't know how to interpret certain blocks. > 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? I think such a unit could best go in the packages, since it is tightly bound to FPC, and definitely non-visual ? Michael. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
