Re: [Lazarus] Repository commit statistics. :-)

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Florian Klaempfl
>  wrote:
>>  The real name of a submitter goes into the log,
>> the person responsible for the commit is known by subversion.
> 
> So you do the same thing but manually - that git does automatically
> for you (and makes it an official feature). 

The bad thing is: if the original patch was made by some who setup git
wrongly (which is rather likely for someone using git seldomly, e.g. I
enter always a random name and email address when setting up an account
on a machine), you don't have a real name of the submitter. Further, I
don't add the email address of the submitter to the log on purpose to
make life for spammers harder.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Repository commit statistics. :-)

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 22:37, Graeme Geldenhuys
>  wrote:
>> Patches submitted to Mantis is
>> applied by other users that have read/write access to the repository.
>> So only those read/write users are shown.
> 
> Yes, properly preserving author info in commits is another thing Git gets 
> right,
> and Subversion does not.

Who needs it? My sat nav can also plan routes for trucks but it is not
the reason why I use it. The real name of a submitter goes into the log,
the person responsible for the commit is known by subversion.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] revision numbers of each SVN tag?

[Florian Klaempfl]

Doug Chamberlin schrieb:
> What if, in response to a last-minute show stopper bug, the scheduled 
> release was immediately superseded by another one with a higher release 
> number? What would be the harm?
> 
> Do you really think that anyone likely to use these programs (FPC and 
> Lazarus) would not be sympathetic and understanding about what happened 
> and readily accommodate themselves to the fact that release x.y.z had a 
> 1-day lifespan and that usable releases went from x.y.z to x.y.z+2? 
> Especially if the explanation was readily available?

You missed the days when we skipped 1.0.8, right? It was an faq for
years: "where is version 1.0.8?"

> 
> It's not like we are running out of release numbers or anything...
> 
> Also, I don't buy the argument that doing this would delay the new 
> release another 4 months. After all, it would be the exact same code 
> being released under the "move the tag" scenario so no additional delay 
> would be needed.

It requires at least another release candidate to get the version number
at all placed right (compiler, makefiles, docs, readmes, installers
) and let it check by other people  and to test if all defines are
still correct. And the more release candidates you do, the more tired
builders get, so times spans get longer and longer with every release
candidate.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] revision numbers of each SVN tag?

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 3:02 PM, Florian Klaempfl
>  wrote:
>>> start the release process. 2-4 months later if anything is broken,
>>> merge and patch that branch at will. Test again
>> Did you ever working on testing a lazarus or fpc release?
> 
> Do you mean... have I tested a release candidate when it was
> announced. It so, then the answer is yes.

The answer is no, you never saw the things behind the scenes.


> 
> Prohibit all read/write access developers from
> writing to tags. "pre-" branches will work perfectly and once all
> release builders are happy, THEN ONLY create a tag.

The last time: everybody was happy, FPC 2.2.4 was uploaded and a day
before it was announce, a serious *SECURITY HOLE* was detected, so we
decided to bite the bullet and decided to fix, rebuild and move the tag.
Now I stop it, you don't get it. But I see, you would have skipped
2.2.4, started over again with 2.2.6-rc1 and delayed the release of a
new fpc version another 4 months ...
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] revision numbers of each SVN tag?

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 00:02, Florian Klaempfl  
> wrote:
>> Very difficult. If a release is created from a branch, nobody can ensure
>> that all release builders built the release candidate from exactly the
>> same revision, if they don't, things might be broken when the final
>> release should be built.
> 
> Why not tag it x.y.z-pre1 then, and if all went well, additionally tag
> the same revision
> as x.y.z, otherwise create x.y.z-pre2 etc.?

What if you realize after x.y.z has been tagged, built and uploaded that
it has a security hole as it happend with fpc?

> 
>> At cvs times we did this for fpc and we had to lock the branch to
>> prevent commits (btw: can git lock branches ;)?)
> 
> Git (and Subversion too) can, in principle, "lock" branches using
> pre-commit hook.

Subversion has a native lock command ;) One can override it, but this is
behaving really bad and I don't expect anybody to do so.

> However, note that in git the whole problem does not exist, since in
> the normal workflow
> nobody except release manager can commit to "release" branch anyway.

So the release manager needs to run his own git repository instead of
having the release tag in the central, fast and reliable repository? The
sad thing about this workflow is anyways, that no release manager can
test all patches because he lacks the appropriate machines so he needs
to merge patches blindly.

> Also, it you _do_ move a tag in git, everybody updating from your
> repository will
> get a big fat warning ;-)
> 

This is fine, but sometimes moving a tag is needed. Period.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] revision numbers of each SVN tag?

[Florian Klaempfl]

Vincent Snijders schrieb:
> 2009/4/15, Graeme Geldenhuys :
>> 2009/4/15 Flávio Etrusco :
>>  >
>>
>>> As I said previously (and was completely ignored ;-), with SVN one can
>>  > rely on repository revisions.
>>  > And if people don't like that, they can use a series of "pre" tags.
>>  > And probably a "pre" branch.
>>
>>
>> Brilliant idea.  Create a "pre-0.9.26" branch (or tag ) and
>>  start the release process. 2-4 months later if anything is broken,
>>  merge and patch that branch at will. Test again and if all is well,
>>  then create a "lazarus_0.9.26" tag (never to be touched because it's a
>>  released version).
>>
>>  How difficult is that???  Logically, Flávio's example makes a lot more
>>  sense that how it is currently done with moving tags.
> 
> To me it feels bad, that in your proposal a release is *always* build
> from a branch and not from a tag.

In 1.0.x/cvs times fpc was built from branches and it was a mess, even
using locking :)
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] revision numbers of each SVN tag?

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> 2009/4/15 Flávio Etrusco :
>> As I said previously (and was completely ignored ;-), with SVN one can
>> rely on repository revisions.
>> And if people don't like that, they can use a series of "pre" tags.
>> And probably a "pre" branch.
> 
> Brilliant idea.  Create a "pre-0.9.26" branch (or tag ) and
> start the release process. 2-4 months later if anything is broken,
> merge and patch that branch at will. Test again 

Did you ever working on testing a lazarus or fpc release?

> and if all is well,
> then create a "lazarus_0.9.26" tag (never to be touched because it's a
> released version).
> 
> How difficult is that??? 

Very difficult. If a release is created from a branch, nobody can ensure
that all release builders built the release candidate from exactly the
same revision, if they don't, things might be broken when the final
release should be built.

At cvs times we did this for fpc and we had to lock the branch to
prevent commits (btw: can git lock branches ;)?), but nevertheless it
caused confusion. So we decided to built from tags and move the tag by
merging if really needed. Believe me, from 15 years fpc development,
we've a lot of experience how to built a release of something complex
like lazarus or fpc (fpc has even a defined release procedure, see
http://wiki.freepascal.org/Release_Template)
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] revision numbers of each SVN tag?

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Florian Klaempfl
>  wrote:
>> And what if someone realizes that one patch is missing?
> 
> Well, is that not what "release canditate" or stable branches are for?
> Users at least expect updates and backports of patches in a branch.
> Then test, test and test! Once everything is working, create a release
> tag based on that branch.

If you think it's so easy, be our guest to coordinate an fpc release :)

2.2.4 was heavily tested but then we recognized a security hole after
everything was packed. Just as a hint: till all different versions of
fpc for one rc are packed, it takes easily 2-4 weeks and lot of poking
by the release coordinator :)

> 
>> Skip a release
>> number? We will never to this again, we did this in FPC 1.0.x times and
>> it caused a lot of confusion. Better a tag is moved ...
> 
> Isn't that what point releases are for??
> 
> * Release 0.9.26.
> * Oh crap, we didn't test enough and 0.9.26 is broken.
> * merge, fix and retest using the branch release 0.9.26 was based on.
> * Release 0.9.26.1

This is not really possible, the defines etc. in fpc are limited
currently to x.y.z

> 
> in the mean time new development continues on unstable trunk (0.9.27)...
> 
> If a release is broken one day after it has been released, then
> clearly not enough testing was done on that stable branch. In that
> case, release candidate branches should have a longer lifespan.

So above.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] revision numbers of each SVN tag?

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Florian Klaempfl
>  wrote:
>> No. It's stupid to tag after a release is built or even worse, build
>> from a branch.
> 
> That's what I meant. If trunk or some "release candidate" branch is
> stable enough to make a release, then tag that specific revision (a
> snapshot of a specific point in time).

And what if someone realizes that one patch is missing? Skip a release
number? We will never to this again, we did this in FPC 1.0.x times and
it caused a lot of confusion. Better a tag is moved ...
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] revision numbers of each SVN tag?

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Vincent Snijders 
> 
>> Another school says that you need to build releases from a tagged version.
> 
> Those learners should go back to school!  :-)

No. It's stupid to tag after a release is built or even worse, build
from a branch. This makes it very hard to ensure that everybody uses the
same revision to do its builds (e.g. FPC releases are build by probably
almost 10 different people). It rarely happens that a release must be
rebuilt but in this case the tag is simply moved by merging a certain
revision.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Large program size - 1.8 MB for empty GUI project

[Florian Klaempfl]

Reenen Laurie schrieb:
> 2009/4/8 Alexey S. Smirnov :
>> The Smart Link process should check what variables/functions/definitions are
>> used in your project to cut off unused code. It is really simple to do so,
>> if some units are listed in Implementation section - linker will only add
>> unit functions that are mentioned in you code, not more.
>> If units are listed in Interface section - it mean that potentially all
>> code  from that particular unit should be included. Because your global
>> variable/class should have access to all provided
>> code/procedures/properties.
> 
> Marc Weustink (i think wrote):
>> Just a note: some people think that units can be compiled in one pass -
>> this is not true. The compiler must stop on every Uses clause, and
> 
> So .exe's should be (much) smaller if your uses units are put mostly
> in implementation (not easy to find circular references), but we say
> rather put it in interface?

No. The location where a unit is included (interface/implementation)
does not matter for smartlinking. If you really want try to drop exe
size, play with the whole program optimization implemented by Jonas in
trunk.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Large program size - 1.8 MB for empty GUI project (uses clause in initialization vs implementation?)

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexey S. Smirnov schrieb:
> Martin Friebe пишет:
>> Is this documented somewhere? I can't follow the logic anyway, the scope 
>> how much my code uses of another unit can not be predicted, simply by 
>> where I include the other code?
>>
>> Actually, I do believe I have seen examples where code form units used 
>> in the interface was successfully smart-linked.
>>
>> However there is a differentiation what can be smart linked and what 
>> not. If a class has RTTI information, then methods from it can not be 
>> removed by smart-linking. Classes with RTTI (afaik) are either included 
>> as a whole or not at all. (And that make sense, because RTTI allows to 
>> access any method by finding it from a resource or literal string; which 
>> are both not parsed by the compiler, and therefore not determinable)
>>
>> Best Regards
>> Martin
>>
>>   
> 
> May the problem will become understandable, if we will do a little
> experiment. So. Let's test the Interface/Implementation Uses sections of
> /lazarus/lcl/graphics.pp. This section for Lazarus 0.9.26 was that:
> |interface
> uses
>   SysUtils, Math, Types, Classes, Contnrs, FPCAdds,
>   FileUtil,
>   FPImgCmn, FPImage, FPCanvas,
>   FPReadPNG, FPWritePNG, PNGComn,  // png support
>   FPReadBMP, FPWriteBMP,   // bmp support
>   FPReadPNM, FPWritePNM,   // png support
>   FPReadJpeg, FPWriteJpeg, // jpg support
>   IntfGraphics,
>   AvgLvlTree,
>   LCLStrConsts, LCLType, LCLProc, LMessages, LCLIntf, LResources,
> LCLResCache,
>   GraphType, IcnsTypes, GraphMath, InterfaceBase, WSReferences;|
> |
> implementation
> uses
>   SyncObjs;|
> 
> It was cleanup by me and now looks like that:
> |Interface
> uses
>   SysUtils, Types,   Classes,
>   FPImgCmn, FPImage, FPCanvas,
>   FPReadJpeg,FPWriteJpeg, // jpg support
>   IntfGraphics,  AvgLvlTree,
>   LCLType,   LMessages, LResources,LCLResCache,
>   GraphType, IcnsTypes, GraphMath, InterfaceBase, WSReferences;|
> 
> 
> |implementation
> uses
>  {FPReadPNG,} FPWritePNG,PNGComn,  // png support
>  {FPReadBMP,} FPWriteBMP,   // bmp support
>  FPReadPNM,   FPWritePNM,   // png support
>  LCLStrConsts,LCLProc,LCLIntf,
>  FileUtil, FPCAdds, Math,
>  SyncObjs;
> 
> |So, previously we have 33 Units mentioned in Interface section and 1 in
> Implementation section. After cleanup we have 19 Units in Interface
> section and 12 in Implementation. 3 Units from Interface section was
> completely removed. ;)
> 
> Both Lazarus and all connected apps and projects are working fine with
> this cleanup.  And if you do the same thing - you will see that that
> size of Lazarus will be 15-20 KB less. May be - because of such
> optimization, may be - because of removing unused units from *Interface*
> section

This could be simply the influence of a different memory layout of the exe.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Easiest way to "case" strings

[Florian Klaempfl]

Marco van de Voort schrieb:
>>> And string-case for my feeling belongs in neither. It is just about racking
>>> up bullet lists in language wars.
>> Well, there is another important design principle. It is sometimes called
>> "orthogonality" -- it means that existing language features can be
>> combined in any way, with as little limitation as possible.
> 
> Yes. But since this is not a simple type, but a complex type, it goes to a
> different class. If that is your argument, make sure it works for arrays, 
> records,
> classes, interfaces and the other complex types too.

Actually, case is not defined for all types but for all ordinal types ;)
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Easiest way to "case" strings

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 00:23, Marco van de Voort  wrote:
>> Since we are close to 20 stringtypes + conversions now, I doubt that this is
>> really the problem.
> 
> Yes, I agree that the string types in FPC are a mess,
> and judging by recent discussion, they are planned to became worse.

This happens if every string type someone could imagine is implemented ;)

> 
>> Is having 6 levels of information
>> hiding (private,public,strict protected, strict private,protected,published)
>> or are the strict* ones just to stop the whining of people that come from
>> other languages?
> 
> No, it is not necessary, but handy sometimes. I agree that these are
> not a big deal,
> and FPC can live without them quite fine, but they do not break anything 
> either.

The problem is: every language needs testing and maintainance. And even
simple language features can have interferences with other code nobody
might see at a first glance.

Anyways, as I said, new language features are ok if they come as a
proper patch with tests and docs.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Easiest way to "case" strings

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 22:40, Florian Klaempfl  
> wrote:
>> Alexander Klenin schrieb:
>> You can rant about it if we reject a patch adding case with strings ;)
>>
>> I'am quite sure, a good patch (clear definition of the scope, support
>> for all string types, clear definition how the strings are interpreted,
>> tests) to implement it won't be rejected.
> 
> That's refreshing, thanks ;-) From other answers I've got a feeling that
> such a patch would be rejected "in principle".

Well, the thumb rule is simple: the people who code decide ;)
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Easiest way to "case" strings

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 07:03, Marco van de Voort  wrote:
>> Well, you can nearly impossibly miss the sliding slope there. First just
>> strings, then hashing to speed it up, then wildcards, then demand for regex
>> etc.
> This is generic argument applicable to any language feature.
> "Sliding slopes" are everywhere, so the safest course of action is not
> to move at all.
> This is what I am ranting about, excessive conservatism leading to a 
> stagnation.

You can rant about it if we reject a patch adding case with strings ;)

I'am quite sure, a good patch (clear definition of the scope, support
for all string types, clear definition how the strings are interpreted,
tests) to implement it won't be rejected.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Mac OS X or iPhone applications created with Lazarus

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> I am hearing constant battering that you cannot create native looking
> Mac 

http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Image:Lazarusmac0.9.25.jpg
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Carbon_interface_internals

> or iPhone applications with Lazarus. 

The iPhone support is too new so no lazarus is available for it yet. But
 FPC supports it natively:
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/iPhone/iPod_development

> By the way, these comments
> come from the CodeGear non-technical newsgroup. Is there any truth to
> this?  

You still believe anything posted in non-technical?
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] TAChart child/parent control integration: request for review

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 03:17, Florian Klaempfl  
> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 02:28, Florian Klaempfl  
>>> wrote:
>>> Actually, I think we still can. The DVCS model itself is so powerful
>> It should first solve the awkwardness of line ending problem, it feels
>> so rcs/cvs like.
> 
> Well, the problem for me is actually from trying to use both svn and hg at 
> once.
> 
> So if one either:
>   1) Uses only svn
>   2) Uses only hg

I don't see how using only hg should solve this? If someone pushs a
commit with mixed/wrong line feeds there is no way to fix this
automatically as far as I can see?

I must admit, I work often on a samba share with a windows editor and
commit from unix (e.g. on my arm), but with subversion, this works
perfectly.

>   3) Uses both, but without svn:eol-style=native property
> then all is well.
> 
> Recently I even suggested to drop svn:eol-style, but apparently it
> is important for some Windows users.

How should it work? The files end up with mixed line feeds or even worse
a full diff because a windows editor might add \r to all line feeds?

> 
> 
>>> Another important thing for me is speed -- just to view a diff
>> A lot of my diffs were full diffs when trying hg for a small project
>> because of the line ending issue so the fast diffs got useless ;)
> 
> Do you know you can fix up commits in DVCS as long as nobody
> pulled your changes yet? (And even after that, but at a risk of
> confusing others).

What do you mean with fix up?

> I must admit, however, that the interface for doing that in Mecrurial is bad 
> --
> it is much better in git.
> 

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] TAChart child/parent control integration: request for review

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 02:23, Florian Klaempfl  
> wrote:
>> Alexander Klenin schrieb:
>>> By the way, Mercurial mirror seems to be stuck again since r18773.
>>> What is the problem with it?
>> Here it is at 18780?
> 
> Works for me now, too. What is the update interval? It seems some
> commits appear immediately,
> while others lags for few minutes to an hour.

Normally every 5 min, if some update doesn't break python on the machine
hosting it as it happened recently.

> 
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 02:28, Florian Klaempfl  
> wrote:
>> Alexander Klenin schrieb:
>>> I resorted to manually converting files back and forth. It is not
>>> hard, but tedious.
>> So we cannot recommend this really to people :(
> 
> Actually, I think we still can. The DVCS model itself is so powerful

It should first solve the awkwardness of line ending problem, it feels
so rcs/cvs like.

> that I will probably
> use Mercurial for Lazarus even though I can now commit to svn directly
> and even despite all the warts of Mercurial's interface.
> See e.g. a comment about patch management I made in issue 13214.
> Another important thing for me is speed -- just to view a diff

A lot of my diffs were full diffs when trying hg for a small project
because of the line ending issue so the fast diffs got useless ;)
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] TAChart child/parent control integration: request for review

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 01:09, Florian Klaempfl  
> wrote:
>> How did you solve the problem of MQ with win32 line endings?
> I did not :-(
> I resorted to manually converting files back and forth. It is not
> hard, but tedious.
> 

So we cannot recommend this really to people :(
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] TAChart child/parent control integration: request for review

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> By the way, Mercurial mirror seems to be stuck again since r18773.
> What is the problem with it?
> 

Here it is at 18780?
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] TAChart child/parent control integration: request for review

[Florian Klaempfl]

How did you solve the problem of MQ with win32 line endings?
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Wiki pages suggestion - feature comparison

[Florian Klaempfl]

Bee schrieb:
>> Indeed, because using packages as a plugin system is abusing packages:
>> packages have no well defined and stable abi being usable from any
>> language thus they are not the right choose for a good plugin system.
> 
> Maybe for the start we could ignore accessibility factor from other 
> languages. To me, having package that can be used as plugin system (as 
> in Delphi) for my own application is more than enough. I don't care 
> about other languages, because I speak Pascal. If someone else would 
> like to make a plugin for my application, then s/he have to write it in 
> Pascal.

Well, he would also need exactly the same version of the compiler, rtl,
fcl and lcl you're using.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Wiki pages suggestion - feature comparison

[Florian Klaempfl]

Gerard N/A schrieb:
> Hi Graeme,
> 
> This is not to start a flame war, but would you care to explain:
> 
>>  * Lazarus has much better Packages than Delphi's dumb packages.
> 
> I'd like to port a Delphi app wich uses package based plugins and as
> far as I know there is no way I can do that with FPC/Lazarus?

Indeed, because using packages as a plugin system is abusing packages:
packages have no well defined and stable abi being usable from any
language thus they are not the right choose for a good plugin system.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Mercurial mirror not updating

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> Since SVN r18698, about 35 hours ago.

Fixed.


___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Not sure if the Laz Devs have seen this...

[Florian Klaempfl]

Michael Van Canneyt schrieb:
> The real reason I keep my eye on git is that Subversion is a real pain
> if you have a lot of branches. Tracking all revisions of a file accross
> branches (something we do a lot at work) is incredibly slow. The subversion
> graph takes meanwhile a full 5 minutes to build up.

How long does it take for you on FPC/Lazarus? I get revision graphs
instantly for FPC/Lazarus with TortoiceSVN 1.5.7.
- Do you have the latest TortoiseSVN installed?
- Did you once update your log cache so that it contains really all items?
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Not sure if the Laz Devs have seen this...

[Florian Klaempfl]

I used git and mercurial at work for small projects to test things a
little bit and both are a real pain compared with svn and I saw no
increased productivity for small projects and I cannot imagine how this
should be different for fpc or lazarus.
- line ending conversion is at the same poor level as cvs: you often end
with full diffs by accident when working on different systems. Ok, I
admit editing files on a unix system through a samba share with a
windows editor is uncommon but I often do it and it breaks horrible with
git and hg.
- no blocking of revisions to merge: svnmerge has a nice feature which
allows to block revisions to be merged to a branch. This is neither
possible with git nor with hg as far as I can see and at least fpc uses
it heavily.
- I often forgot a hg up after an hg push/hg pull and ended with files
full of conflicts due to this.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Mercurial mirror is down?

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> http://florianklaempfl.de:8000/lazarustrunk returns 404 error to me.
> 

Fixed.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Mercurial patches

[Florian Klaempfl]

Florian Klaempfl schrieb:
> Alexander Klenin schrieb:
>> On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 19:04, Florian Klaempfl  
>> wrote:
>>> Alexander Klenin schrieb:
>>>> Ok, I installed Mercurial and used it to generated a series of patches
>>>> (to Object Inspector).
>>>> Let us see how it goes.
>>>>
>>> I guess what you need are the mercurial queues. Let us know how things work.
>> Sorry if I was unclear -- I already did this, so it is now your turn
>> to see how things work ;-)
> 
> I was only unsure if you use the patch queue feature provided by
> mercurial :)

Oh, and as another note: http://florianklaempfl.de:8000/fpctrunk
contains an mercurial mirror of fpc trunk
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Mercurial patches

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 19:04, Florian Klaempfl  
> wrote:
>> Alexander Klenin schrieb:
>>> Ok, I installed Mercurial and used it to generated a series of patches
>>> (to Object Inspector).
>>> Let us see how it goes.
>>>
>> I guess what you need are the mercurial queues. Let us know how things work.
> 
> Sorry if I was unclear -- I already did this, so it is now your turn
> to see how things work ;-)

I was only unsure if you use the patch queue feature provided by
mercurial :)
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Mercurial patches

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 01:38, Florian Klaempfl  
> wrote:
>> Alexander Klenin schrieb:
>> Just as a side note: http://florianklaempfl.de:8000/lazarustrunk/ is a
>> mercurial mirror of lazarus. It might help you to maintain your patches.
>> Mercurial works fine on windows as well and isn't a posix/unix centric
>> hack as git is.
> 
> Ok, I installed Mercurial and used it to generated a series of patches
> (to Object Inspector).
> Let us see how it goes.
> 

I guess what you need are the mercurial queues. Let us know how things work.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] TAChart: double-buffering (issue 0012377) questions

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 11:46, Alexander Klenin  wrote:
>> So this question remains. Or should I protect double-buffering with
>> {$IFDEF WIN32}?
> 
> Since noone is commenting, I assume my patch is ok ;-)
> (http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=12377)
> Can someone review/apply it? It is again holding further TAChart work.
> 

Just as a side note: http://florianklaempfl.de:8000/lazarustrunk/ is a
mercurial mirror of lazarus. It might help you to maintain your patches.
Mercurial works fine on windows as well and isn't a posix/unix centric
hack as git is.

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] TAChart: Request to review/apply patch 12758

[Florian Klaempfl]

Luiz Americo Pereira Camara schrieb:
> Florian Klaempfl escreveu:
>> Alexander Klenin schrieb:
>>   
>>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 11:39, Paul Ishenin  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Same for Alexander Klenin - if you need to update TAChart very often
>>>> then ask about write access to svn/lazarus/trunk/components/tachart
>>>>   
>>> Yes, it can be a workaround for my particular case, so whom should I ask?
>>> 
>> For FPC ask me ;
> 
> It would be helpful having svn write access to fpc sqlite directory.
> Is there any specific rules?

Of fcl-db? Ask Joost if it's ok then I'll add you.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] TAChart: Request to review/apply patch 12758

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 11:39, Paul Ishenin  wrote:
>> Same for Alexander Klenin - if you need to update TAChart very often
>> then ask about write access to svn/lazarus/trunk/components/tachart
> 
> Yes, it can be a workaround for my particular case, so whom should I ask?

For FPC ask me ;)
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] TAChart: Request to review/apply patch 12758

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 20:16, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Alexander Klenin schrieb:
>>> I.e. my specific problem can be solved in SVN by creating a branch of 
>>> TAChart
>>> component and giving me commit access to it, but then
>>> similar branch should be created for my patches to DBGrid,
>>> and yet another one for patches to SynEdit (both stalled for about a month 
>>> now),
>>> etc.
>>> Obviously, this is not a scalable solution for many developers ;-)
>>>
>> But isn't the problem that the patches don't get into the central
>> repository?
> 
> They will get there eventually. The key thing is that patches can be 'batched'
> for review/application and not spoon-fed one by one.

This can be done with an svn branch as well? I'am rather sure the
lazarus people give you write access to a branch if you ask. And this
has a real advantage: if you just commit your changes to your local
repository, the changes get lost if you "disappear"  and nobody did pull
them yet (this is also why we recommend to attach patches to "bug
reports", they won't get lost this way), the patches are lost. If they
are in a svn branch, they aren't lost.

> Look at what is going on at kernel.org -- a feature can be implemented as a
> series of 10 or even 100 patches -- imagine how much time it would take
> to submit and review each patch sequentially.

The point about kernel.org is that they have dedicated reviewers. If
lazarus has dedicated reviewers/merger then this could be done as well.
The actual merge command of a branch in svn is a non brainer as well.

> 
>> BTW: An fpc/lazarus git repository would be really no fun: due to the
>> flaky connection a git clone of a converted repository is from
>> svn.freepascal.org basically not possible, at least not for me from germany.
> 
> Sorry, I can not parse this sentence.

For testing purposes, I converted the fpc repository to git. However,
due to the slow and unreliable connection of our vc server to my place,
I was not able to clone this repository to my machine at home. A broken
svn checkout can be continued, a git clone apparently not.

> 
>> how does a DVCS scale better in this regard for
>> small and medium sized projects (<100 developers)?
> 
> DVCS does not require any central administration to create branches
> for every developer/feature. 

It requires it. Or how would you create releases then? The features must
go into this repository and if noone does so, the feature is pretty
useless as well.

> It also does not require network connection
> for doing commits, which is important to some contries/regions
> where Internet is still not cheap or reliable enough.
> 

See above :)
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] TAChart: Request to review/apply patch 12758

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> Obviously, this is not a scalable solution for many developers ;-)
> 

I forget to mention: how does a DVCS scale better in this regard for
small and medium sized projects (<100 developers)? As long as you don't
get rejected commits due to two commits by two people at the same time?
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] TAChart: Request to review/apply patch 12758

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
>> I really wonder how a DVCS would solve this or what would be different?
>> You just apply it to your local working copy and you've it in your builds?
> 
> Yes. The most important difference in this case is that DVCS
> would preserve local history. This is similar to every developer having
> his own branch in SVN (or even arbitrary number of local branches),
> with merges being almost as trivial as SVN's commits.
> 
> I.e. my specific problem can be solved in SVN by creating a branch of TAChart
> component and giving me commit access to it, but then
> similar branch should be created for my patches to DBGrid,
> and yet another one for patches to SynEdit (both stalled for about a month 
> now),
> etc.
> Obviously, this is not a scalable solution for many developers ;-)
> 

But isn't the problem that the patches don't get into the central
repository?

Though I've write access to the fpc repository ;) I've also several
local "branches" (actually plain copies of my fpc checkout) with some
changes in it.

But if it's not feasible for you, you can still use git-svn, no?

BTW: An fpc/lazarus git repository would be really no fun: due to the
flaky connection a git clone of a converted repository is from
svn.freepascal.org basically not possible, at least not for me from germany.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] TAChart: Request to review/apply patch 12758

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> See http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=12758
> 
> Sorry to bother Daruis (and everyone else) again, but
> this patch is holding my further work on TAChart.
> 
> Such are the problems of using centralized version control ;-)
> 

I really wonder how a DVCS would solve this or what would be different?
You just apply it to your local working copy and you've it in your builds?
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Cocoa bindings

[Florian Klaempfl]

Mac Programmer schrieb:
> Maybe Florian could elaborate a bit on where the NDA issues lie. With
> developing a compiler, the run-time, the apps themselves?

It seems that this is not the problem anymore however, testing the port
doesn't seem to be possible so far.

Anyways, I wonder if it is even allowed/possible to run/publish (L)GPL
software on the iPhone. Apple has to accept the (L)GPL to propagate the
software through iTunes. However, the (L)GPL prohibits means to prevent
the user to install modified version of the software.

> 
> Sure it's a controlled environment. Welcome to the 21st century. Many of
> us develop software for organizations with extreme restrictions on what
> users can do with their computers. Apple's "review" process seems fairly
> tame by comparison.

Compared to whom? Windows Mobile? Linux?

> 
> I was just seeing if anyone else was interested in joining the party.
> 
> http://www.ipodnn.com/articles/08/12/05/300m.app.store.downloads/
> 
> It's not like we're getting married to the iPhone apps we develop. I
> think the idea is that you spend maybe a month doing it, then you submit
> it and wait and see if anyone likes it. Apple is assuming all of the
> marketing, credit card processing, currency exchange, hosting, etc. as
> well as a lot of responsibility that you don't have to worry about. For
> that they take 30% and transmit the other 70% into your bank account.

First, you pay $99/year to be able to develop applications for the
iPhone/iPod. But if this is no problem, maybe we should change the
license of FPC ;)

> You can also post free apps and Apple assumes the cost of distributing
> those for free.

... and if Apple doesn't like your application, they kick it, see the
PodCaster case.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Cocoa bindings

[Florian Klaempfl]

Mac Programmer schrieb:
> It appears as though Felipe has provided a complete set of bindings for
> doing Cocoa development. Is it possible to cross-compile against these
> to create an app for the iPhone and iPod Touch? I don't believe the
> version of OS X on those devices includes the Carbon framework, so it'll
> have to be Cocoa.
> 
> It would seem like this is a burgeoning development area that's too big
> to ignore:

Afaik there are still NDA issues.

> 
> http://legacy.macnn.com/articles/08/12/04/iphone.overtakes.win.mo/
> 
> http://blogs.oreilly.com/iphone/2008/11/turning-ideas-into-application.html

I don't think that the iphone is a threat to WM. It is a treat to Nokia
or Motorola which produce mobiles for people who don't install
applications on their phone. Or does anybody expect any serius
application development for the iphone as long as apple controls if you
are allowed(!) to distribute your application or not?
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] [joke] Explanation about the Lazarus logo

[Florian Klaempfl]

Damien Gerard schrieb:

I can explain you at least part of the lazarus logo: I like cats and
especially cheetahs (though they aren't common in Germany ;)) so I have
choosen the cheetah as FPC logo.

> http://cdn.ugoto.com/pictures/the_end_of_the_chase-53b.jpg

Funny picture :)

> 
> Sorry I found it funny :)
> 
> 
> --
> Damien Gerard
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> La raison de la bouffe est toujours la meilleure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Lazarus mailing list
> Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
> http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
> 

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] A new competitor to Lazarus and Free Pascal

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 11:36 PM, David Pethes
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> You can try OProfile http://oprofile.sourceforge.net/about/ too; no
>> extra support in fpc needed, just compile your app with debug info enabled.
> 
> 
> Thanks.  It's amazing. A year ago, when I wanted to do profiling of my
> FPC apps, I couldn't find anything that works. Now I have an abundant
> choice of profiling tools.   :-)

Maybe you should have asked :) gprof works on linux for 10 years (on
windows it is hairy) and valgrind support is also since 2.0 in FPC.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] A new competitor to Lazarus and Free Pascal

[Florian Klaempfl]

Florian Klaempfl schrieb:

>> And even thought FPC and Lazarus has support for 'gprof', I don't know
>> of a single developer that managed to get it working under Linux.  I
>> tried numerous times before and searching my mailing list archive of 3
>> years I can see numerous other developers also being unsuccessful. I
>> always get a blank output file.  :-(
> 
> Because everybody is using valgrind. I had no need to use gprof for
> years because valgrind is much better.

BTW: Just tried gprof under linux, works as described in the manual.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] A new competitor to Lazarus and Free Pascal

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:12 PM, Brad Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Seconded! I discovered valgrind/kcachegrind only 3 weeks ago and it's 
>> fabulous!
>> If you are interested at all in profiling your application then valgrind 
>> --tool=callgrind
> 
> 
> Can you point me to a wiki page or document that explain how to use it
> with FPC under Linux?  

http://lazarusroad.blogspot.com/2007/09/using-valgrind-to-profile-fpc.html

Though fpc -h | grep valgrind shows everything one needs to know.

> Or if you can email a short decription (steps)
> in how to get started using FPC?  I would be very interested in
> profiling our product and tiOPF project.
> 
> 
> Regards,
>   - Graeme -
> 
> 
> ___
> fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
> http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
> ___
> Lazarus mailing list
> Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
> http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
> 

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] A new competitor to Lazarus and Free Pascal

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Florian Klaempfl
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Just use valgrind/kcachegrind:
>> <http://kcachegrind.sourceforge.net/html/pics/KcgShot3Large.gif>
>> ?
> 
> That looks a lot more complicated and difficult to understand than the
> REALBasic image. The bottom left rectangle looks almost like the CPU
> circuitry under a microscope. :-)  And I have no clue what that part
> actually represents.

Better http://kcachegrind.sourceforge.net/html/Shot1Large.html ?

> 
> And even thought FPC and Lazarus has support for 'gprof', I don't know
> of a single developer that managed to get it working under Linux.  I
> tried numerous times before and searching my mailing list archive of 3
> years I can see numerous other developers also being unsuccessful. I
> always get a blank output file.  :-(

Because everybody is using valgrind. I had no need to use gprof for
years because valgrind is much better.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] A new competitor to Lazarus and Free Pascal

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> I never thought I would say this about the Basic language :-)
> But Real Software has made a pretty impressive product called
> REALBasic. When I read about this back in 2005, I didn't think they
> would be around for long. But to my surprise, they have been hammering
> away and improving REALBasic year-on-year. REALBasic overcomes many of
> the limitations we know about VB6 and has some impressive features -
> in the language and IDE. Including cross compiling for Linux, Windows
> and Mac, plus it's very easy to install. It also comes with a build-in
> profiler... See screen shot link.  Damn, it would be nice having such
> a profiler for Free Pascal / Lazarus development tools. ;-)

Just use valgrind/kcachegrind:

?
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Forums on www.lazarus.freepascal.org is virtually unusable

[Florian Klaempfl]

Maybe Michael H. can find out why it's slow and then we can look for
solutions how to improve it for example by moving part of the site to
another machine.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] using two versions of RTL from lazarus

[Florian Klaempfl]

Henry Vermaak schrieb:
>> How can I use lazarus to switch between those two?
> 
> easiest is probably to install the ppu files to different locations,
> then invent a custom define and add it to your fpc.cfg to switch
> between different versions (where the -Fu paths are defined).
> 
> you don't really need to do this if you are just worried about debug
> info, since you can strip the debug info afterwards.

This is not completetly true, when debugging it's also better to turn
the optimizer off to get better results.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Lazarus repository in Git (summary)

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> 
> I'll be keeping the Git version of the Lazarus repository. So if total
> disaster strikes you guys can simply get a copy from me. ;-)

Well, if there is real interest, we can of course create an offical git 
mirror.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Lazarus repository in Git (summary)

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> As promised, here is the final details of comparing SubVersion and Git
> using the *full* Lazarus history.

A git repository of full fpc takes 1,2 GB (checkout of trunk+history).
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On 11/5/08, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>  > Git for our company repositories.  In SubVersion, branching is like an
>>  > afterthought. Manually having to track merges to a branch (though
>>  > apparently there was been some work towards this), etc...
>>
>>
>> This is not true. svnmerge works very well for years for FPC.
> 
> I have never heard of svnmerge. It's not on my Ubuntu system either,
> and I have svn installed - so I gather it's not a standard SubVersion
> tool.  

# svnmerge
The program 'svnmerge' is currently not installed.  You can install it
by typing:
apt-get install subversion-tools
-bash: svnmerge: command not found

> Could you tell me more about this? 

It does merge tracking for you. We use it for years to track merged
changes to the fixes branches.

> Is it something the FPC team
> created for FPC? Where can I get it and can you give a possible usage
> example?

http://www.orcaware.com/svn/wiki/Svnmerge.py
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 3:20 PM, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The better way is imo to create a branch at the main repository where
>> you can work, so as I said in my other mail, it is backed up, everybody
>> can review it early and easily,
> 
> My last point on the subject... You last statement is a "pipe dream".
> Nobody has time to even implement all there own todo list items and
> nice features. So where is everybody going to get the time to review
> other peoples "in progress" code as well, and in all the branches.

We do this at least for the compiler and the rtl.

> 
> But like you said, the Windows support in not ideal yet, so the whole
> point of Git is moot at this time. I respect that.

You should have a look at mercurial then. Mercurial was started with the
same motivation as git but isn't a heap of unixish script hacks.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Vincent Snijders schrieb:
> 2008/11/5 Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
>>> And to use branches I need write access to the SVN repository. So now
>>> you will be happy giving everybody write access?
>> People having asked so far, got their own branch, at least for FPC.
>>
>>> And filling the
>>> 'branches' directory with everybody's experiments.
>> Doing svn rm is rather simple if needed. But I'd be happy to see people
>> filling branches with experiments, yes :)
>>
> 
> Apparently this is not the case for the fpc docs.

Well, even I don't owe to commit to the fpc docs repository without fear
:) This is something special ;)
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On 11/5/08, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>  > Hm. It is true that DCVS _allow_ various policies and workflows 
>> unavailable
>>  > to centralized ones, but I do not see how such policies are required.
>>
>> At least the development of FPC has shown that such policies are needed.
> 
> And why can't you have that same policies for a Git repository?

A git repository requires even more.

> 
>>  > His changes do not get into the release -- same as if he would make 
>> changes
>>  > to his working copy in SVN and not commit / send patches out.
>>  > Notice the very important difference here: while in SVN these changes
>>  > are "hidden"
>>
>> No.
> 
> Florian, I fail to understand your problem And fully agree with
> Alexander. At the moment with SubVersion - if I do not send you a
> patch, my changes are going nowhere. 

Indeed, but as soon as you commit on svn, things are save, this is not
true for git.

> So if my hard drive breaks, that
> information is lost. The exact same rule applies to Git. If I don't
> push the changes to you, or send you a patch via email and my hard
> drive breaks. That information is lost - unless somebody
> pulled/fetched changes from my Git repository.
> 
>> This is where one uses branches in svn: everything is already in a
>>  central storage, interested people get easily informed about the change
>>  because they read commit logs, no need for local backups, no hazzle to
>>  publish local trees and fast access for everybody.
> 
> And to use branches I need write access to the SVN repository. So now
> you will be happy giving everybody write access? 

People having asked so far, got their own branch, at least for FPC.

> And filling the
> 'branches' directory with everybody's experiments.  

Doing svn rm is rather simple if needed. But I'd be happy to see people
filling branches with experiments, yes :)

> That brings me to
> the other point (also mentioned in the Git video).  What if you like
> to experiment, but don't want others to see? Say I try something out
> and it fails, or the idea just isn't viable anymore.  Everybody has
> seen your failure and you feel miserable. At least with Git, I could
> experiment without bothering others, not even requiring write access
> to the "primary" repository. If I fail, only I know about it. If I
> succeed, I will push the changes forward. :-)

If they are accepted. In the worst case you worked months on the wrong
track because you got no feedback. It is a point for NDA affected stuff,
but imo no common use case for FPC/Lazarus.

> 
>>  >> How does testing work?
>>  > As usual, somebody runs tests and checks the results.
>>
>> No, everybody, not somebody, has to run tests, at least for FPC.
> 
> Yes, we use SubVersion in our company as well and also have that rule.
> We still get times when developers fail to run the tests before they
> commit - and trunk is broken.  This happens often in Lazarus Trunk as
> well!

This doesn't solve git either, it makes things probably even worse:
people think there local tree works and they tested all commits so they
push without testing.

> 
> What we do for the tiOPF project is setup automated unit tests. It
> runs every 3 hours under Windows with Delphi 7, 2005, 2007 and every 3
> hours under Linux with FPC 2.2.3. Summary results are emailed to the
> tiopf.dailybuilds newsgroup. If failures occurred, the failure results
> are attached to that email.

FPC does this too (nightly) but it often doesn't help either ;)

> So even if you commit without running tests locally first, the longest
> a bug will go unnoticed is 1.5 hours (Windows and Linux test runs are
> staggered).
> 

Anyways, since git is near to unusable on windows anyways, it is out of
the game :)
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On 11/5/08, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>  the more complex use of a dvcs. Here at work I'am happy if people use
>>  svn up/svn co correctly and not do svn rm/svn add to commit a changed file.
>>
>>  With subversion is this self regulated and the structure subversion
>>  offers is enough for smaller projects like fpc/lazarus.
> 
> 
> My (personal) two main benefit for Git is:
>  * I can easily and quickly do revision comparisons locally without
> communicating with the remote server

This is indeed a point and that's why I installed the mercurial mirror
already some time ago.

>  * I can do local commits and keep a history of those commits. Then
> once my long taking feature is complete, I can generate a patch for
> "primary" repository.
> 

The better way is imo to create a branch at the main repository where
you can work, so as I said in my other mail, it is backed up, everybody
can review it early and easily, you don't need to take the hazzle to get
your own tree online.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On 11/5/08, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
>>
>>  For the record, the whole lazarus svn repository on idefix is 392 MB,
>>  i.e. including all history.
> 
> 
> What is "idefix"?

The machine running svn.freepascal.org.

> 
> Like I mentioned before... I did a fresh Lazarus Trunk (head) revision
> checkout with svn.  The total size of that single (head) revision was
> 314MB. That's one revision with no history.  If I do a 'svn export' of
> that directory to get rid of all the .svn directories, the size drops
> to 76MB.

392 MB is the size of repository on the server.

> 
> Anyway, I have no idea what 'idefix' is so I can't really comment on
> your message.
> 
> 
> Regards,
>   - Graeme -
> 
> 
> ___
> fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
> http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
> ___
> Lazarus mailing list
> Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
> http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
> 

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

See my other mail ;)

> Please watch the YouTube demo on Git. You will find it enlighening -
> I'm busy watching it now. The guy doing the demo has only used Git in
> small teams 3-6 developers and admits he hasn't used in in large
> environments (like Linux kernel), yet he is still impressed by the
> improvements over CVS and SVN.
> [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dhZ9BXQgc4]

What I read so far about the "advantages" of git in small teams can be
achieved easier with svn. I can't help people if they don't know how to
use svn.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 22:18, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> No. The point is that a dvcs has drawbacks. The distributed nature
>> requires a very strict management of repository structure and for the
>> changeset flow.
> Hm. It is true that DCVS _allow_ various policies and workflows unavailable
> to centralized ones, but I do not see how such policies are required.

At least the development of FPC has shown that such policies are needed.

> While, as I said, I do not advocate moving Lazarus to DCVS at this time,
> I think your notion of DCVS complexity is exaggerated.
> 
> Let us see if I can help it ;-)
> 
>> Which repository is used the create the releases?
> The one currently agreed on by the developers -- just as with SVN.

So what's the advantage then? With a DCVS you've try to force the
developers by organisatorical means to follow a structure. With SVN, the
technical aspects force some structure so it is self regulating and much
easier to keep.

> 
>> What if somebody never pushes his changes and keeps them local till his 
>> harddisk breaks?
> His changes do not get into the release -- same as if he would make changes
> to his working copy in SVN and not commit / send patches out.
> Notice the very important difference here: while in SVN these changes
> are "hidden"

No.

> and not available to other users/developers, DVCS allow others to
> use/test/review/build upon changes even before they hit the central 
> repository.

This is where one uses branches in svn: everything is already in a
central storage, interested people get easily informed about the change
because they read commit logs, no need for local backups, no hazzle to
publish local trees and fast access for everybody.

> Another DCVS advantage is that the local changes need not be lumped
> together into a single commit, which is very important for large changes.

?

> 
>> How does testing work?
> As usual, somebody runs tests and checks the results.

No, everybody, not somebody, has to run tests, at least for FPC.

> 
>> When are tests run? At every commit? Every push?
> That, or at every pull/fetch, or periodically --
> there is no difference in centralized vs distributed VCS here.
> 

Of course there is: before I commit a change to the fpc repository, I
run the testsuite to avoid regressions (takes at least 10 min). When I
use a dvcs, I've to run this tests twice: when I commit (so I know that
my patch works) and when I push all the commits. This is wasted time for me.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:

For the record, the whole lazarus svn repository on idefix is 392 MB,
i.e. including all history.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On 11/5/08, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Git is a hype. Git might be nice for projects with >100 developers and
>>  which has (like linux) dedicated branch maintainers. Git allows to
>>  support complicated project structures with several layers of
>>  maintainers and project managers. But this is something smaller projects
>>  like FPC or Lazarus don't need.
> 
> That's like saying I'm a single developer, I don't need a Source
> Code Version tool.

No. The point is that a dvcs has drawbacks. The distributed nature
requires a very strict management of repository structure and for the
changeset flow. Which repository is used the create the releases? Who
merges to this repository and when? What if somebody never pushes his
changes and keeps them local till his harddisk breaks? How does testing
work? When are tests run? At every commit? Every push? Not to mention
the more complex use of a dvcs. Here at work I'am happy if people use
svn up/svn co correctly and not do svn rm/svn add to commit a changed file.

With subversion is this self regulated and the structure subversion
offers is enough for smaller projects like fpc/lazarus.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On 11/5/08, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>  > This is impressive.  Mozilla has 10 years of history in their
>>  > SubVersion repository totalling 12Gig of information. SubVersion also
>>  > requires over 240,000 files in a single directory to handle the
>>  > +240,000 commits.
>>
>> And who cares? This is on one *server*.
> 
> Not all filesystems like +240,000 files in a single directory.

First, the 24 files in one dir are history since svn 1.6 and if it
was a real issue, one could still use the bdb back end. Second, if you
run such a server, you should think about the FS and use something like
xfs, jfs or reiserfs. Their overall performance on servers is usually
better anyways.

> 
>>  > Converting that repository with full history to Git
>>  > used only 420MB. See the URL below for details - "Small Space
>>  > Requirements" section.
>>
>> Great, every client gets 420 MB of junk almost never needed.
> 
> You don't have to get a full history on "check-out".

And what's the advantage of git then ;)?
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On 11/5/08, Alexander Klenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> They are usually of about equal size, for example, svn checkout of
>>  Pidgin (IM tool) is 122 MB while complete history in Git repository is 148 
>> MB.
> 
> I don't think that is incorrect. The svn checkout will only contain
> the last revision (no history). That means 122MB for the HEAD
> revision. Compare that to the Git repository of148MB for the full
> history!  A huge difference in amount of information and size. Git is
> a LOT smaller.

122 MB is still less than 148 MB. But anyways, the git/dvcs hypers
always forget about the drawbacks: e.g. git or mercurial don't allow
partial checkouts: every checkout contains the full source tree. I do
often partial checkouts, e.g. I've several checkouts only of the
compiler dir.

> 
>>  But the OP's point was that local operations are MUCH faster,
>>  so much that it changes the work flow. For example, to show a few last
>>  log messages
>>  from the lazarus repository takes me 10-20 sec., and showing a diff between
>>  to revisions of a file -- another 30-60 sec., while in Git these
>>  operations are instantaneous.
> 
> This drives me absolutely nuts!! I often track bugs by comparing
> revisions. And doing that for remote repositories like FPC or Lazarus
> is a total pain in the butt! It takes forever! We don't all live in
> the USA with 20+Mb internet connections to our office or home.

Use the mercurial mirror to do so. However, as I said, since it seems
that nobody uses it, I consider it not as a real issue or even pain.

> 
> 
>>  Another compelling feature of Git is the possibility to create and manage
>>  local branches. For example, when I want to add a feature to Lazarus,
> 
> This is one of the major features in Git that is convincing me to try
> Git for our company repositories.  In SubVersion, branching is like an
> afterthought. Manually having to track merges to a branch (though
> apparently there was been some work towards this), etc...
>

This is not true. svnmerge works very well for years for FPC.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Florian Klaempfl schrieb:
> But at least speaking for FPC: anybody interested in FPC development can
> get write access to own svn branchs where he can do his development on
> FPC. Using svnmerge, merging of such branches is very easy. This has
> also the advantage that changes don't get lost in somebody's local
> repository either because it might not be backed up as the central svn
> or because the submitter forgets about his work. I even consider such a
> solution better than a dvcs: 

Forgot to mention: this allows also an earlier review of patches with
little effort.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Alexander Klenin schrieb:
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 18:02, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Git is a hype. Git might be nice for projects with >100 developers and
>> which has (like linux) dedicated branch maintainers. Git allows to
>> support complicated project structures with several layers of
>> maintainers and project managers. But this is something smaller projects
>> like FPC or Lazarus don't need.
> 
> I disagree. I, for example, have moved all my Unix-based projects to Git,
> even personal ones, and it is much better to work with even in a
> single-developer case.
> In particular, ability to create commits off-line is very valuable to me.

But what does it help? Nobody sees such a off-line commit. If I work on
different things on subversion, I just copy the repository.

> 
>>> * Git repositories are MUCH smaller.
>> Who did tell you this? Linus? Does he have the history of the Linux code
>> since version 0.1 in his repository?
> Since Git is distributed, the notion of "his" repository is rather vague,
> but such a repository definitely exists:
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/old-2.6-bkcvs.git;a=summary

last change Mon, 4 Apr 2005 16:08:33 +

It does not contain all changes made ever to linux as e.g. the lazarus
svn does: the lazarus svn contains _all_ changes made ever to lazarus.

> 
> 
>>> * Git is local, so checking history or doing commits are really fast.
>> I doubt that a repository containing the full lazarus history is smaller
>> than a repository containing each file twice.
> They are usually of about equal size, for example, svn checkout of
> Pidgin (IM tool) is 122 MB while complete history in Git repository is 148 MB.
> But the OP's point was that local operations are MUCH faster,
> so much that it changes the work flow. For example, to show a few last
> log messages
> from the lazarus repository takes me 10-20 sec., 

With TortoiseSVN's cache it's also instantenous for me :)

> and showing a diff between
> to revisions of a file -- another 30-60 sec., while in Git these
> operations are instantaneous.

This is indeed a imo small disadvantage of svn but it doesn't compensate
the huge bureacracy required for a dvcs.

> 
>>> * You have lots of backups of Git repositories because they are local
>>> to each developer. In SubVersion, if the repository server is down,
>>> everybody is stuck.
>> Only with committing. With a DVCS you're also stuck if the repository
>> for the "official" code is dead. Great that you can "commit" to your
>> local repository but nobody will see it so what's the point about it?
> With SVN if the central repository is dead, then
> the whole history of the project vanishes with no chance of restoration.
> Of course, the central repository should be backed up, but still if the 
> failure
> occurs, it is catastrophic.

You need this with git too because nobody ensures that anybody has
really such a copy.

> On the contrary, with DVCS (not only Git) such a failure is just a
> minor inconvenience,
> since each developer has a local copy of the history, and can easily publish 
> it.

It could be that someone has :) Further, it requires that someone
publishes this address and it gets spread. Such thing sounds nice but in
reality I see no value in it.

> 
> Another compelling feature of Git is the possibility to create and manage
> local branches. For example, when I want to add a feature to Lazarus,
> I would like to present it as a series of clean patches for easier review
> and better log history. However, I can not do this with Subversion in
> a practical way,
> so I have to submit first patch of the series, wait for it to get accepted,
> submit the second one etc.
> This wastes both my and reviewer's time so much that it can take months
> instead of weeks to complete a moderately complex feature.
> Actually, I due to this obstacle have given up trying to develop
> more complex features for Lazarus and just submit small patches for
> trivial things ;-)

For this use case we've the mercurial mirror. However, as far as I can
see, nobody uses it for real work. Probably because of the higher
learning curve of a dvcs.

But at least speaking for FPC: anybody interested in FPC development can
get write access to own svn branchs where he can do his development on
FPC. Using svnmerge, merging of such branches is very easy. This has
also the advantage that changes don't get lost in somebody's local
repository either because it might not be backed up as the central svn
or because the submitter forgets about his work. I even consider such a
solution better than a dvcs: the danger of changes being lost is really
low. Of course, this can be done only for smaller projects, but I still
consider FPC/Lazarus small in this regard.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> I forgot to mention Here is a nice article on someone that moved
> from SubVersion to Git.
> 
>   http://www.aidanf.net/node/120

The development modell of git doubles testing efforts with little gain:
first, I've to test before I commit to my local repository. Then I've to
test after pushing all stuff to the central reposiroty. This article is
close to useless because it seems to consider only one developer.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On 11/5/08, Graeme Geldenhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>  * Git repositories are MUCH smaller. SubVersion has duplicates of each
>>  file which actually more than doubles the size of a repository.
> 
> This is impressive.  Mozilla has 10 years of history in their
> SubVersion repository totalling 12Gig of information. SubVersion also
> requires over 240,000 files in a single directory to handle the
> +240,000 commits. 

And who cares? This is on one *server*.

> Converting that repository with full history to Git
> used only 420MB. See the URL below for details - "Small Space
> Requirements" section.

Great, every client gets 420 MB of junk almost never needed.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SubVersion vs Git

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> Seeing that Lazarus and FPC are reasonable sized projects and have
> been using SubVersion for some time, there should be a few SubVersion
> experts around.
> 
> Have any of you weighed up the pros and cons between SubVersion and
> Git? Has FPC or Lazarus team ever considered moving to Git? 

Git is a hype. Git might be nice for projects with >100 developers and
which has (like linux) dedicated branch maintainers. Git allows to
support complicated project structures with several layers of
maintainers and project managers. But this is something smaller projects
like FPC or Lazarus don't need.

> I'm busy
> downloading a 1 hour YouTube video demoing Git
> [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dhZ9BXQgc4], so maybe afterwards I
> will have a better understand of Git.
> 
> But from what I had read so far, Git seems superior in a few areas...
> I will list what I know below... What are your thoughts?
> 
> * Git makes branching and merging really simple.

This is a simplified view. Git doesn't solve either the real problems of
merging: testing of the merged code and solving textuel conflicts.

> 
> * Git repositories are MUCH smaller. 

Who did tell you this? Linus? Does he have the history of the Linux code
since version 0.1 in his repository?

> SubVersion has duplicates of each
> file which actually more than doubles the size of a repository.
> 
> * Git is local, so checking history or doing commits are really fast.

I doubt that a repository containing the full lazarus history is smaller
than a repository containing each file twice.

> 
> * You have lots of backups of Git repositories because they are local
> to each developer. In SubVersion, if the repository server is down,
> everybody is stuck.

Only with committing. With a DVCS you're also stuck if the repository
for the "official" code is dead. Great that you can "commit" to your
local repository but nobody will see it so what's the point about it?

> 
> * Moving a SubVersion repository to Git is well supported. History stays 
> intact.
> 
> 
> 
> What I'm not 100% sure about is:
> 
> *  How well is Git supported on other platforms than Linux?

Near to unusable, mercurial is much better in this regard but I still
don't see any advantage for lazarus or fpc in using a dvcs. I run a read
 only mirror mercurial of the lazarus
(http://florianklaempfl.de:8000/lazarustrunk) and fpc repository
(http://florianklaempfl.de:8000/fpctrunk) for those interested in
playing around with it.

> 
> * Does Git handle eol-style like SubVersion, or does it have an
> equivalent feature?

It is a linux project, what do you expect ;)? It has some strange
automatic handling which probably works as well as that one of cvs.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] [OT] New "free" IDE from Trolltech

[Florian Klaempfl]

Mac Programmer schrieb:
> 
> (2) Continued standardizing on the dominant IDE's for most large 
> organizations, that is on Visual Studio, Eclipse or maybe XCode if 
> you're doing serious Mac work. This also frees up the compiler and tool 
> developers from having to do an IDE for their products.

Using a generic IDE like Eclipse saves almost no time, the time 
consuming and great things like good debugger support, source code 
browsing require still a lot of work and one is bound to some strange 
code base.

> 
> - A version of SWIG that supports Object Pascal syntax, so we could 
> create Python (and possibly other) interfaces to our classes, 

This is as useless as a a .Net backend. Such a beast might have OP 
syntax but everything must be recoded anyways due to different libraries 
etc.

> 
> - A .NET strategy. I'm not suggesting a compiler that produces .NET 
> assemblies, but rather some way to use our classes with .NET, maybe by 
> wrapping them in a .NET assembly.
> 
> - Possible integration with the big IDE's.

IMO the only IDE superior to Lazarus is Visual Studio, but this is only 
due to the great debugger and things like Edit and Continue and this is 
something which cannot achived by some plugin like integration.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Cannot install Lazarus-0.9.26/fpc-2.2.2 on Suse 10.0, help needed

[Florian Klaempfl]

Bart schrieb:
> I'm not keen on upgrading my Suse to 11.0 (or 10.3), because I run it
> on an old computer (Celeron 700 Mhz, 512 Mb), and getting X to
> recognise and setting up my LCD monitor was a PITA.
> 
> Does anyone know if it is at all possible to build fpc 2.2.2 form
> source with glibc 2.3?
> If so, I could tarts trying to work my way around this.

Building everything from source should work, even more for FPC itself
you can use the tar archive to install.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] MacOSAll.pas has invalid UTF-8 characters

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
>>From what I can gather the following unit seems to have invalid UTF-8 
>>characters
>   /packages/univint/src/MacOSAll.pas

What makes you think the file is utf-8 encoded?
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Mantis statistics

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 9:55 AM, Michael Van Canneyt
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There is such a page, but I don't think it is available for 'normal'
>> users. Only devels/mantis managers can view this page.
> 
> Why?  There is no secret information about a graph showing project
> summary information?

The reason is probably load. Generating the graphs takes several seconds
for e.g. FPC.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Can Lazarus Target Nintendo DS?

[Florian Klaempfl]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
> If I have the Nintendo DS FreePascal compiler installed under Windows, is
> it possible to get Lazarus to target that OS/CPU?
> 
> How do I get it to appear in the IDE's list of possible targets?

Just if some one wants to update lazarus, fpc knows currently: 
'linux','go32v2','win32','os2','freebsd','beos','haiku','netbsd',
 'amiga','atari','solaris', 'qnx', 'netware','openbsd','wdosx',
 'palmos','macos','darwin','emx','watcom','morphos','netwlibc',
 'win64','wince','gba','nds','embedded','symbian'


___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

[Lazarus] make install problem on system which never had lazarus

[Florian Klaempfl]

Is this known that make install seems to broken on a system never had
lazarus?

make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/florian/fpc/lazarus'
/bin/cp -Rfp . /usr/local/share/lazarus
ln -sf /usr/local/share/lazarus/lazarus /usr/local/bin/lazarus-ide
ln -sf /usr/local/share/lazarus/startlazarus /usr/local/bin/startlazarus
ln -sf /usr/local/share/lazarus/lazbuild /usr/local/bin/lazbuild
cat /usr/local/share/lazarus/docs/lazbuild.1 | gzip >
/usr/local/share/man/man1/lazbuild.1.gz
cat: /usr/local/share/lazarus/docs/lazbuild.1: No such file or directory
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] In the name of science

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On 8/26/08, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> This is probably an urban legend that nobody can answer this: CON is a
>>  reserved device name (console, try echo asdf > CON) like e.g. COM1. You
>>  can't create a folder called COM1 either if you're system has COM1.
> 
> I expected something like that, but would the same then apply to
> something like STDOUT?  Yet I can create a file named STDOUT
> 
> 
> I still can't find a logical reason for (2).

It's a bug in notepad which guesses the encoding wrong. I saw once an 
explaination ... wait ... wikipedia knows it 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_hid_the_facts
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] In the name of science

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> Off-topic but very cool... actually weird!  :-)
> 
> 
> TRICK #1
> An Indian discovered that nobody can create a FOLDER
> anywhere on the computer which can be named as 'CON'.
> This is something pretty cool...and unbelievable. ..
> At Microsoft the whole Team, couldn't answer why this
> happened!

This is probably an urban legend that nobody can answer this: CON is a 
reserved device name (console, try echo asdf > CON) like e.g. COM1. You 
can't create a folder called COM1 either if you're system has COM1.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Pasic Ide - previously named Lightsarus

[Florian Klaempfl]

Ciprian Mustiata schrieb:

> This memory measurements are biased.

Not more biased than your statements about huge applications.

 > If you take that memory is not freed at once
 > (excluding if you program using IDisposable) because of GC, in a well
 > crafted benchmark, always will make a .NET application to use more
 > than a Lazarus one.

So what's your point? Main memory is more expensive than hard disk space.

 > So, do it by yourself. Anyway, the scope of the today preview was to
 > show how it will be about and you are very welcome to feedback any
 > oppinions.

I guess most people agree that this has nothing to do with lazarus: it's 
neither an addon nor compatible, so you might advertise somewhere else.

 > are kept in RAM, only for one reason, is faster a Show than to create
 > a dialog from scratch.

Of course, else .Net applications would suck even more.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Pasic Ide - previously named Lightsarus

[Florian Klaempfl]

Ciprian Mustiata schrieb:
> Thank you Florian for your bug report.
> 
> Right now should launch or at least to display a better error in a Message 
> Box. Is fixed and uploaded the fix.

Maybe you should now work on being not huge as promised. After opening 
two files memory usage is at 45 MB.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Pasic Ide - previously named Lightsarus

[Florian Klaempfl]

Ciprian Mustiata schrieb:

Hi Lazarus devel team and users,
- FreePascal applications are
huge!


Well, PasIDE needs 28 MB here to display an error at startup while 
FPC/Lazarus needs 24 MB to run a full RAD IDE. Not to talk about the 
.Net framework downloads.


So I wonder what's huge :)
<>___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Obtaining TIDesigner

[Florian Klaempfl]

Boian Mitov schrieb:
>   Outdated, but shows some of the history.

Everybody is free to post any page on the web.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Obtaining TIDesigner

[Florian Klaempfl]

Boian Mitov schrieb:
>   I still stand by my statement that this so called "optimization" is a 
> design bug in FPC. Of course this is just my opinion, and you guys can 
> disagree. That is no problem, as long as there are work around etc ;-) . 
> Only the time will tell who is right. My prediction is that the so called 
> "optimization" will lead to so many problems overtime that at some point it 
> will be removed, and the interfaces will start working as they in all other 
> languages I have used, 

What did you use so far? DOS batch files? Maybe listen to things people 
tell you.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Google says "this site may harm your computer"

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On 16/06/2008, John vd Waeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> When clicking a link on a Google search result that points to
>>  lazarus.freepascal.org... "Site is listed as suspiciuous"...
> 
> 
> Upgrade to Linux and let viruses be a thing of the past!  ;-)

Indeed, root kits are the future ;)
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Svn mirror is not in sync with primary server

[Florian Klaempfl]

Luiz Americo Pereira Camara schrieb:
> The svn mirror at http://svn2.freepascal.org/svn/lazarus/trunk is stuck 
> at revision 15291 while svn logs show that current revision is 15354.
> 
> Can someone take a look at it?

Fixed.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] ARM-WinCE test - DBF

[Florian Klaempfl]

Joost van der Sluis schrieb:
> Op zaterdag 17-05-2008 om 21:06 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> I probably do not see the depth of the problem, and this seems to be just 
>> too easy, but for me this should be done on the compiler level: how about a 
>> compiler switch which forces the compiler to "think" as if the  "unaligned" 
>> keyword was there at  the potentially  problematic assignments.  FPC and 
>> Lazarus aims to have a single source for all platforms, and this is broken 
>> if you have to change the source for ARM.
> 
> Is there an "unaligned" keyword? 

Yes.

> What does it do? And how does it helps
> me? 

Tell the compiler to access memory location assuming that it is not 
aligned naturally:

var
   p : plongint;

begin
   getmem(p,8);
   inc(pointer(p),1);
   { seg. faults: }
   p^:=1234;
   { works }
   unaligned(p^):=1234;
   { seg. faults }
   writeln(p^);
   { works }
   writeln(unaligned(p^));
end.

> Remember I told you this:
> 
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "Joost van der Sluis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> And the only thing I know about alignment, is that it has something
>> to
>>> do with starting each 'thing' (word, integer, longint) on an
>>> memory-location that could be divided by 2/4/8/whatever.
>>>
> 
> Joost
> 
> ___
> Lazarus mailing list
> Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
> http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
> 

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] I ported some components, not sure if I can publish them :-(

[Florian Klaempfl]

A.J. Venter schrieb:
 "Diese Komponenten sind Public Domain, das Urheberrecht liegt aber beim
 Autor."
>> [...]
>>
>>> In Germany, "public domain" does not exist. One *can not* give up the
>>> copyright. But one can allow unrestricted use.
>> So what would you think reading that license?
> 
> Either way, Germany cannot dictate to foreigners the terms under which
> they may make their works available unless they made public domain
> publishing so illegal as
> to ban the import of public domain works from countries that allow it
> - something I seriously doubt.

As I said before: one cannot drop the copyright in Germany (actually 
"Urheberrecht", correct translation would be probaly "creator right") 
because one did the work and nobody else, it's an absolut right which 
cannot be transfered except by inheritance.

But one can allow unrestricted use which is practically the same as 
public domain.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] I ported some components, not sure if I can publish them :-(

[Florian Klaempfl]

Luca Olivetti schrieb:
> Hello,
> 
> I ported the RackCtls components (http://www.picsoft.de/compon.htm 
> basically since I used the 7 segment display one in the past, but the 
> other controls could be useful too) to Lazarus.
> 
> However the license seems a bit contradictory to me, this is what the 
> source says:
> 
> "Diese Komponenten sind Public Domain, das Urheberrecht liegt aber beim 
> Autor."
> 
> google translate says "these components are public domain but the 
> copyright lies with the author".
> 
> I contacted the author (twice) to ask if I could publish my adaptation 
> but he didn't reply.
> I think that I can do whatever I want with "public domain" software but 
> the "the copyright lies with the author" clause confuses me.
> Do you think I should go ahead and publish them or should I keep them to 
> myself?
> 

In Germany, "public domain" does not exist. One *can not* give up the 
copyright. But one can allow unrestricted use.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] RTL functions and file system encoding issues

[Florian Klaempfl]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> On 12/03/2008, Graeme Geldenhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>  Solution in fpGUI and MSEgui.  Create your own RTL functions dependent
>>  per platform.
>>  eg:
>>   fpgSetCurrentDirectory()
>> Under Linux it uses UTF-8 so is a wrapper for RTL SetCurrentDirectory.
>> Under Windows we have to convert UTF-8 to ANSI or WideString and
>>  call the appropriate Windows.SetCurrentDirectory[A,W] functions.
> 
> 
> It was just pointed out to me that not all Linux installations are
> UTF-8 either (some older systems etc). So more black magic has to
> happen for Linux's RTL wrapper functions as well.

Just include cwstrings and assign the file names you get from the rtl
functions to widestrings and you're fine. Alternativly you can apply
UTF8Encode onto the file name.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] SVN WinCE Interface Build Fails

[Florian Klaempfl]

Paul Michell schrieb:
> I've just tried to build the WinCE interface off current SVN and the build 
> fails with:
> 
> Free Pascal Compiler version 2.2.1 [2008/02/20] for arm
> Copyright (c) 1993-2007 by Florian Klaempfl
> Target OS: WinCE for ARM
> Compiling interfaces.pp
> Compiling winceint.pp
> Compiling winceproc.pp
> Compiling winceextra.pp
> Compiling winceproc.pp
> winceproc.pp(718,88) Warning: Mixing signed expressions and longwords gives a 
> 64bit result
> winceproc.pp(751,4) Note: User defined: TODO: create copy bitmap to section 
> and use bits
> winceproc.pp(935,1) Error: Illegal expression
> winceproc.pp(935,5) Error: Illegal expression
> winceproc.pp(935,9) Error: Illegal expression
> winceproc.pp(935,10) Error: Illegal expression
> winceproc.pp(935,10) Fatal: Syntax error, ";" expected but "identifier MINE" 
> found
> Fatal: Compilation aborted
> make[2]: *** [interfaces.ppu] Error 1
> make[2]: Leaving directory `C:/Applications/Lazarus/lcl/interfaces/wince'
> make[1]: *** [wince_all] Error 2
> make[1]: Leaving directory `C:/Applications/Lazarus/lcl/interfaces'
> make: *** [interfaces] Error 2
> 
> There appears to be some work-in-progress type editing around line 935 that 
> leaves the interface in an uncompilable state.

Since it's not in svn, it seems that it is your local copy which in
unclean, just revert the affected file if this is the only change.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus