Hi
At the moment I am using the following to compile FPC.
make install INSTALL_PREFIX=/opt/fpc_2.0.x
I never use the text ide (fp) and am getting compiler errors with it,
after getting a svn update (revision 3626).
1) Conflict in the ide/MakeFile was checked into SVN.
2) After fixing that, I
Hi,
I looked into the main Makefile, to see if I could spot anything, so tried:
make install INSTALL_PREFIX=/opt/fpc_2.0.x TARGET_DIRS_IDE=0
but that also didn't do it. It still tried to compile the text ide project.
Regards,
Graeme.
On 5/22/06, Graeme Geldenhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot
Op Mon, 22 May 2006, schreef Graeme Geldenhuys:
> Hi
> At the moment I am using the following to compile FPC.
>
> make install INSTALL_PREFIX=/opt/fpc_2.0.x
>
> I never use the text ide (fp) and am getting compiler errors with it,
> after getting a svn update (revision 3626).
>
> 1) Conflic
On 5/22/06, Daniël Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You can make individual subprojects, for example
"make compiler_cycle rtl fv fcl", however, I don't think this is
comfortable. Better fix the IDE compilation, try "fpcmake -Tall" in the
IDE directory.
OK, I did that fpcmake, though I ain't
Op Mon, 22 May 2006, schreef Graeme Geldenhuys:
> On 5/22/06, Daniël Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > OK, I did that fpcmake, though I ain't sure what it did. I did say
> > something of creating a new Makefile.
That is what it does indeed.
> > -Fu/opt/svn/fpc_2.0.x/src/rtl/units/i386-
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 19 mei 2006, at 15:20, ik wrote:
When executing a program using TProcess, it seems that Output.read
does not return from the reading, until the execution of the process
is over.
The returning probably happens every 4KB of data or so (and once the
program has finished). T
In recent binutils the program "pwd.exe" (it returns current directory name) is
omitted.
But makefile fails with a hint "You need GNU utils package..." (well, it does
not explicitly write, that it needs binutils).
Why don't emit "You need GNU utils package... (pwd.exe)"?
(PWD.EXE and some vers
On 5/22/06, Daniël Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > -Fu/opt/svn/fpc_2.0.x/src/rtl/units/i386-linux
It adds the rtl directory correctly. Please check is keyboard.ppu is
present there.
Yup!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/opt/svn/fpc_2.0.x/src/rtl/units/i386-linux$ ls -l keyboard.*
-rw-r--r-- 1 grae
>
> At the moment I am using the following to compile FPC.
>
> make install INSTALL_PREFIX=/opt/fpc_2.0.x
Try IDE=0, if that doesn't work, try renaming the fv dir.
Both used to work, but don't know if they still do.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-d
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
The following remark in the Delphi help sheds more light on the issue:
"When working with negative TDateTime values, computations must handle
time portion separately. The fractional part reflects the fraction of
a 24-hour day without regard to the sign of the TDateTime
I did notice that if I renamed the ide directory to ide.old, it
managed to compile, but I wasn't sure if it would maybe skip other
units it shouldn't have, so wondered it there was a parameter I could
pass to make, to do it correctly.
I will try the IDE=0 now...
Graeme.
On 5/22/06, Marco van d
Using IDE=0 doesn't work here, it still tried to compile the ide directory.
Graeme.
On 5/22/06, Marco van de Voort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> At the moment I am using the following to compile FPC.
>
> make install INSTALL_PREFIX=/opt/fpc_2.0.x
Try IDE=0, if that doesn't work, try renami
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Bram Kuijvenhoven wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
The following remark in the Delphi help sheds more light on the issue:
"When working with negative TDateTime values, computations must handle
time portion separately. The fractional part reflects the fraction of
a 24-ho
> On Mon, 22 May 2006, Bram Kuijvenhoven wrote:
> > This is really bad -- I supposed the TDateTime was a nice 'linear' mapping
> > of
> > time (which is much nicer for all kinds of calculations).
>
> It is, but only for dates after 1899-12-30. God only knows why Microsoft
> picked this date.
Ju
Op Mon, 22 May 2006, schreef Graeme Geldenhuys:
> On 5/22/06, Daniël Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > -Fu/opt/svn/fpc_2.0.x/src/rtl/units/i386-linux
> > > > >
> > > > > It adds the rtl directory correctly. Please check is
> > > > keyboard.ppu is
> > > > > present there.
> > > >
> > >
On 5/22/06, Daniël Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > I do notice that the date on those files are from the previous
> > > > time I
> > > > built fpc 2.0.3. I guess if keyboard.pp hasn't change since
> > > > then,
> > > > "make install ..." wouldn't recompile it. Or does 'make
> > > >
On 5/22/06, Bram Kuijvenhoven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I guess we will need plenty of unit tests to make sure all the functions work
consistent, in particular also for dates close to and before 29-12-1899 :)
(Note: I sent some mail explaining the TryEncodeDateTime function some time ago
(21-
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 5/22/06, Bram Kuijvenhoven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I guess we will need plenty of unit tests to make sure all the functions
work consistent, in particular also for dates close to and before 29-12-1899
:)
(Note: I sent some mail explaining
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 22 May 2006, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
>
>> On 5/22/06, Bram Kuijvenhoven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I guess we will need plenty of unit tests to make sure all the functions
>> work consistent, in particular also for dates close to and before
>> 29-12
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 5/22/06, Bram Kuijvenhoven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I guess we will need plenty of unit tests to make sure all the functions
work consistent, in particular also for
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 22 May 2006, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
>
>> Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 22 May 2006, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
>>>
On 5/22/06, Bram Kuijvenhoven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess we will need plenty of unit tests to make sure a
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 5/22/06, Bram Kuijvenhoven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I guess we will need plenty of unit
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> 1. fpcunit didn't exist at the time the FPC tests were implemented.
> 2. Using FPCunit creates a dependency on it. The tests can run mostly
>with only the system unit...
Which dependencies? Maybe they can be reduced and a fpcunit can be
ad
On 5/22/06, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Should we convert existing tests to fpcunit ?
No, too much work, no real gain :)
Just curious...
I have never looked at the tests created in FPC, but how much work
(lines of code) would it take to test something like the following
sni
Graeme Geldenhuys schreef:
On 5/22/06, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Should we convert existing tests to fpcunit ?
No, too much work, no real gain :)
Just curious...
I have never looked at the tests created in FPC, but how much work
(lines of code) would it take to test some
Vincent Snijders wrote:
> dt := EncodeDateTime(1652, 6, 15, 12, 34, 56, 12);
> if '1652-06-15 12:34:56' <> tiUtils.tiDateTimeAsIntlDateDisp(dt)
>then halt(5);
>
> []
> end.
We use the simple approach with halt because using the fpcunit for basic tests
would require that OOP works always
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Vincent Snijders wrote:
dt := EncodeDateTime(1652, 6, 15, 12, 34, 56, 12);
if '1652-06-15 12:34:56' <> tiUtils.tiDateTimeAsIntlDateDisp(dt)
then halt(5);
[]
end.
We use the simple approach with halt because using the fpcunit for basic t
On 22 mei 2006, at 16:38, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
We use the simple approach with halt because using the fpcunit for
basic tests
would require that OOP works always but it could be easily broken
and thus all
tests would fail. So we designed the test suite in a way which keeps
prerequisits a
Ok, so every set of tests is a actual program.
[I am not forcing fpcUnit, just curious as what FPC's tests can do.
Also not sure what your knowlegde is on the workings of a xUnit
testing framework. ]
So if you have to test something a little more complex, and every
unittest needs some predefine
On 22 mei 2006, at 17:01, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Where in SubVersion are the fpc tests located?
fpc/tests
Jonas
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Ok, so every set of tests is a actual program.
[I am not forcing fpcUnit, just curious as what FPC's tests can do.
Also not sure what your knowlegde is on the workings of a xUnit
testing framework. ]
So if you have to test something a little mor
On 5/22/06, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We use the simple approach with halt because using the fpcunit for basic tests
would require that OOP works always but it could be easily broken and thus all
tests would fail. So we designed the test suite in a way which keeps
prerequisits a
Hello,
I'm new to this list (and to Free Pascal...)
What are the news from bug #6618 (ex 4733), on building shared libraries on a
x86_64 architecture?
http://www.freepascal.org/mantis/view.php?id=6618
I did some tests, and it seems to bee still present in 2.0.2 and current 2.1.1
snapshot (I en
Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
> On 22 mei 2006, at 16:38, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
>
>> We use the simple approach with halt because using the fpcunit for
>> basic tests
>> would require that OOP works always but it could be easily broken and
>> thus all
>> tests would fail. So we designed the test suite i
The attached patch fixs some problems with negative TDateTimes.
It could be that the changes in DecodeDate are for the same problem as
Bram already send a patch for:
+ removed obsolete DayTable
+ fixed DateTimeToTimestamp, EncodeDate, DecodeDate, DecodeTime for
TDatetimes < 0
+ MSecsToTimeSt
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Ok, so every set of tests is a actual program.
[I am not forcing fpcUnit, just curious as what FPC's tests can do.
Also not sure what your knowlegde is on the workings of a xUnit
testing framework. ]
So if you have to
The makefile of the testsuite now simply gets the fpcunit from the fcl
dir and compiles it if necessary. Since the fpcunit depends only on rtl
units, I see no problem with this.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepa
Dominique Leducq wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm new to this list (and to Free Pascal...)
>
> What are the news from bug #6618 (ex 4733), on building shared libraries on a
> x86_64 architecture?
> http://www.freepascal.org/mantis/view.php?id=6618
>
> I did some tests, and it seems to bee still present
Giulio Bernardi wrote:
> Hi,
> I was playing around with lazarus and I found that solution to a bug
> (6950) is trivial.
> But it needs a constant (SPI_GETFLATMENU) that is not in
> rtl/win/wininc/defines.inc
> (or rtl/win32/wininc/defines.inc for fpc 2.0.x).
> Is it ok if I send a patch to add all
On Mon, 22 May 2006 18:07:52 +0200
Joost van der Sluis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The attached patch fixs some problems with negative TDateTimes.
Can you introduce constants instead of all these hardcoded numbers so the
code is more readable ?
Micha
Micha Nelissen wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2006 18:07:52 +0200
Joost van der Sluis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The attached patch fixs some problems with negative TDateTimes.
Can you introduce constants instead of all these hardcoded numbers so the
code is more readable ?
Maybe Brams mail shoul
On 5/22/06, Vincent Snijders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can you introduce constants instead of all these hardcoded numbers so the
> code is more readable ?
>
Maybe Brams mail should be incorporated, given the fact that the
constants don't have a clear meaning.
Vincent.
This is exactly why
On 5/22/06, Vincent Snijders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From Greame I would like to know how he proposes to update the
TestSuite, if a new tests it added.
I am busy looking at the /tests directory now, to understand how tests
get grouped. This should give me a clearer idea of what is possible.
On Mon, 2006-05-22 at 23:06 +0200, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> On 5/22/06, Vincent Snijders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From Greame I would like to know how he proposes to update the
> > TestSuite, if a new tests it added.
>
> I am busy looking at the /tests directory now, to understand how tes
On 5/21/06, Giulio Bernardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Should they be merged or left separate from the others?
I mean, something like:
SPI_SETWORKAREA = 47;
{ Windows Me/2000 and higher }
SPI_GETACTIVEWINDOWTRACKING = 4096;
I think it is a a good thing to add this small comment about
> -Message d'origine-
> De : Florian Klaempfl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Envoyé : lundi 22 mai 2006 19:56
> À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]; FPC developers' list
> Objet : Re: [fpc-devel] shared libraries on x86_64 Linux ?
>
> Dominique Leducq wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm new to this list (and t
46 matches
Mail list logo
