Al Boldi schreef:
Vincent Snijders wrote:
Ok. You can download your patch by (all on one line):
svn diff http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/tags/release_2_0_2
http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/tags/release_2_2_0 > ugrade.patch
Thanks a lot!
When will this be on sourceforge as .bz2?
Why wou
Vincent Snijders wrote:
> Ok. You can download your patch by (all on one line):
> svn diff http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/tags/release_2_0_2
> http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/tags/release_2_2_0 > ugrade.patch
Thanks a lot!
When will this be on sourceforge as .bz2?
Thanks again for the grea
I see a lot of complains / demands, so I can't help but to say:
If you see a problem, you can contribute a fix. If you expect someone
else to fix it for you (doesn't matter who broke it), at least be
polite and patient.
If you don't like Lazarus, get your money back.
thank you for your attention
Al Boldi schreef:
Vincent Snijders wrote:
IMHO zipped incremental updates are impossible, because you cannot zip
file removals.
I think you can, like this:
diff -ruNp file.pas /dev/null > file.diff
patch < file.diff
This removes the file.
Ok. You can download your patch by (all on one li
Vincent Snijders wrote:
> IMHO zipped incremental updates are impossible, because you cannot zip
> file removals.
I think you can, like this:
diff -ruNp file.pas /dev/null > file.diff
patch < file.diff
This removes the file.
Thanks!
--
Al
___
Al Boldi schreef:
Vincent Snijders wrote:
Al Boldi schreef:
Is there any specific reason you are stuck with 2.0.2 and can't
upgrade? If it's a good reason, I can consider adding a IFDEF in the
code.
Well, when Vincent starts posting incremental updates, I may actually be
able to upgrade easil
Vincent Snijders wrote:
> Al Boldi schreef:
> >> Is there any specific reason you are stuck with 2.0.2 and can't
> >> upgrade? If it's a good reason, I can consider adding a IFDEF in the
> >> code.
> >
> > Well, when Vincent starts posting incremental updates, I may actually be
> > able to upgrade
On 22/01/2008, Al Boldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is there any specific reason you are stuck with 2.0.2 and can't
> > upgrade? If it's a good reason, I can consider adding a IFDEF in the
> > code.
>
> Well, when Vincent starts posting incremental updates, I may actually be able
> to upgrade e
Al Boldi schreef:
Is there any specific reason you are stuck with 2.0.2 and can't
upgrade? If it's a good reason, I can consider adding a IFDEF in the
code.
Well, when Vincent starts posting incremental updates, I may actually be able
to upgrade easily.
Are you referring to me? If so, wha
On 22/01/2008, Vincent Snijders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You could also add them with {$IFDEF VerboseDebugFewBugs} and use
> -dVerboseDebugFewBugs in your private builds.
>
I should really do that. Thanks for the idea.
Regards,
- Graeme -
__
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> On 22/01/2008, Al Boldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Before you do that, I just tried fpGUI and it didn't compile due to
> > cursorfont unit missing. So I added {$include cursorfont.inc} from
> > fpc/packages/extra/forms, then it compiles ok, but I get this crash on
> >
Lord Satan wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 14:15:03 +0100
Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The only problem is that you have another goal which is to be Delphi
compatible. When two goals are in conflict, as they are, you should make
a choice. Either drop Delphi compatibility and use native
Graeme Geldenhuys schreef:
As for the latest trunk revision of fpGUI (actually the last week or
so) it's been a bit unstable with verbose output. I'm hunting down a
few bugs and added lots of debug code in there to test between the
supported platforms. It should be back to normal by the end of th
On 22/01/2008, Al Boldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Before you do that, I just tried fpGUI and it didn't compile due to
> cursorfont unit missing.
> So I added {$include cursorfont.inc} from fpc/packages/extra/forms, then it
> compiles ok,
> but I get this crash on run using fpc2.0.2:
The las
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 14:15:03 +0100
Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The only problem is that you have another goal which is to be Delphi
> compatible. When two goals are in conflict, as they are, you should make
> a choice. Either drop Delphi compatibility and use native widgetsets, o
I don't know whether the Toolbar has been correctly fixed (bug 0010530:
Toolbar background not painted), but bug 0010562: (LazDe toolbar shows
previous background) certainly has not been resolved - I had assumed it
was a consequence of the previous bug, and should be resolved when it
was fix
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> On 22/01/2008, Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Moving implementation from LCL to widgetset is simply the WRONG way to
> > > go.
> >
> > Then use fpGUI or mseGUI. This is not wrong way, it is way selected by
> > lazarus team long time ago. Custom controls can
Paul Ishenin ha scritto:
Giuliano Colla wrote:
Paul Ishenin ha scritto:
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
GtkApiWidget is a special widget for custom controls, which do
everything
themselves. It is not for regular LCL controls.
TToolButton and TToolBar are also custom controls.
AFAIK Marc wanted to
On 22/01/2008, Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Moving implementation from LCL to widgetset is simply the WRONG way to
> > go.
> Then use fpGUI or mseGUI. This is not wrong way, it is way selected by
> lazarus team long time ago. Custom controls cannot bring native
> functionality - only
On 22/01/2008, Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> > Yes, and I wanted that too, but this is not easy since gtk, win32,
> > carbon and qt needs implementation in one moment.
> >
>
> You see what I mean?
> Moving implementation from LCL to widgetset is simply the WRONG way to go.
> It p
Giuliano Colla wrote:
Paul Ishenin ha scritto:
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
GtkApiWidget is a special widget for custom controls, which do
everything
themselves. It is not for regular LCL controls.
TToolButton and TToolBar are also custom controls.
AFAIK Marc wanted to replace eventually TToolBa
Paul Ishenin ha scritto:
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
GtkApiWidget is a special widget for custom controls, which do everything
themselves. It is not for regular LCL controls.
TToolButton and TToolBar are also custom controls.
AFAIK Marc wanted to replace eventually TToolBar/TToolButton with real
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
GtkApiWidget is a special widget for custom controls, which do everything
themselves. It is not for regular LCL controls.
TToolButton and TToolBar are also custom controls.
AFAIK Marc wanted to replace eventually TToolBar/TToolButton with real widgets
(not LCL drawn).
Zitat von Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Damien Gerard wrote:
> >
> > On Jan 22, 2008, at 9:24 AM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 22/01/2008, Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Whoever broke it, wo
Damien Gerard wrote:
On Jan 22, 2008, at 9:24 AM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 22/01/2008, Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Whoever broke it, would you mind taking a look at fixing it
Please update your svn version and retest on
On Jan 22, 2008, at 9:24 AM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 22/01/2008, Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Whoever broke it, would you mind taking a look at fixing it
Please update your svn version and retest once again. That was
al
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 09:24:25 +0100 (CET)
Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
>
> > On 22/01/2008, Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Whoever broke it, would you mind taking a look at fixing it
> > > >
> > >
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> On 22/01/2008, Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Whoever broke it, would you mind taking a look at fixing it
> > >
> > Please update your svn version and retest once again. That was already
> > fixed.
>
>
> Sorry, but I don'
On 22/01/2008, Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Whoever broke it, would you mind taking a look at fixing it
> >
> Please update your svn version and retest once again. That was already
> fixed.
Sorry, but I don't think so. :-( Just got a update. Now running
r13826. Did a Buil
Graeme Geldenhuys пишет:
Hi,
This always used to work fine, but lately any Toolbar component
doesn't paint it's canvas background. This appears under GTK1 and
GTK2. What changed to break it? Can we undo that change to get it
back to normal again? It's very annoying when you use the Editor
To
Hi,
This always used to work fine, but lately any Toolbar component
doesn't paint it's canvas background. This appears under GTK1 and
GTK2. What changed to break it? Can we undo that change to get it
back to normal again? It's very annoying when you use the Editor
Toolbar add-on package with L
31 matches
Mail list logo
