Hi
I'm trying to build the fpc svn development version on Red Hat
Enterprise Linux 6.7. I already have the fpc-2.6.4-1.x86_64,
fpc-src-2.6.4-140420.x86_64 and lazarus-1.4.2-0.x86_64 rpms installed.
The build is failing like this:
# make clean all install INSTALL_DIR=/var/tmp/testfpc
.
.
[
Am 08.08.2015 00:37 schrieb Ralf Quint freedos...@gmail.com:
On 8/6/2015 8:25 PM, Xiangrong Fang wrote:
It seems that $packrecord does not work at all.
I always explicitly use PACKED Record as in
Type ifmap = PACKED Record
mem_start: dword;
On Fri, 7 Aug 2015, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Hi,
Just curious, what is FPC's documentation license? At moment it seems
like it doesn't specify any all - which might not be a good idea. I
looked in the fpcdocs repository and in all the generated PDF's.
Normally open source projects specify a
Michael Van Canneyt michael-y8GAwIkqPAJpn7uciFS/b...@public.gmane.org
writes:
I fundamentally do not believe in licenses. Not even free ones.
Hence I specify none for the docs.
Ehh, I like this one…when considering to write something, it’s
cumbersome that one has to think about licenses, law
On 08 Aug 2015, at 10:04, Michael Van Canneyt mich...@freepascal.org wrote:
I fundamentally do not believe in licenses. Not even free ones.
Hence I specify none for the docs.
The problem with this is that if you don't specify a license, the default in
copyright law is that no one is
On Sat, 8 Aug 2015, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 08 Aug 2015, at 10:04, Michael Van Canneyt mich...@freepascal.org wrote:
I fundamentally do not believe in licenses. Not even free ones.
Hence I specify none for the docs.
The problem with this is that if you don't specify a license, the default
On 2015-08-08 10:13, Jonas Maebe wrote:
The problem with this is that if you don't specify a license, the
default in copyright law is that no one is allowed to do anything
with your work without explicit permission from you
Correct, and which actually applies a lot of restriction.
I've been
On 08/08/15 11:21, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
If you believe in copyright law, yes. I don't believe in that either.
As the saying goes: reality is that which, when you stop believing in
it, doesn't go away...
PS. And anyway: the whole discussion is moot. The latex files do contain
some kind
Jonas Maebe jonas.maebe-3rqwkoel1alvsukgzv2...@public.gmane.org
writes:
As the saying goes: reality is that which, when you stop believing in
it, doesn't go away...
(un)Fortunately. ;)
Sincerely,
Gour
--
As a blazing fire turns firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the
fire of knowledge
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 08 Aug 2015, at 10:04, Michael Van Canneyt mich...@freepascal.org wrote:
I fundamentally do not believe in licenses. Not even free ones.
Hence I specify none for the docs.
The problem with this is that if you don't specify a license, the default in
copyright law is
El 08/08/15 a les 09:30, Sven Barth ha escrit:
Am 08.08.2015 00:37 schrieb Ralf Quint freedos...@gmail.com
mailto:freedos...@gmail.com:
On 8/6/2015 8:25 PM, Xiangrong Fang wrote:
It seems that $packrecord does not work at all.
I always explicitly use PACKED Record as in
Type
On Sat, 8 Aug 2015, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 2015-08-08 10:13, Jonas Maebe wrote:
The problem with this is that if you don't specify a license, the
default in copyright law is that no one is allowed to do anything
with your work without explicit permission from you
Correct, and which
12 matches
Mail list logo
