Re: [fpc-pascal]Lazarus +FPC

2003-03-28 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 23:54:48 +1000 > James Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 02:41:17PM +0100, Marco van de Voort wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 02:52:31PM +0200, A.J. Venter wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > How mu

Re: [fpc-pascal]Lazarus +FPC

2003-03-28 Thread Mattias Gaertner
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 23:54:48 +1000 James Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 02:41:17PM +0100, Marco van de Voort wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 02:52:31PM +0200, A.J. Venter wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > How much compatibility is broken between fpc-1.0.6 and fpc-laz 1.0.

Re: [fpc-pascal]Lazarus +FPC

2003-03-28 Thread Marco van de Voort
> > > > Though the amount of problems seems to decrease with each new fixes version, and > > I hope that trend continues > > In future will we see Lazurs start to work with the normal FPC compilers > without the additional need to download and install the a specially > built compiler for it ? T

Re: [fpc-pascal]Lazarus +FPC

2003-03-28 Thread James Mills
On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 02:41:17PM +0100, Marco van de Voort wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 02:52:31PM +0200, A.J. Venter wrote: > > > Hi, > > > How much compatibility is broken between fpc-1.0.6 and fpc-laz 1.0.7 ? > > > > Why can't Lazarus be run with just the normal FPC compiler anyway ? Wh

Re: [fpc-pascal]Lazarus +FPC

2003-03-28 Thread Mattias Gaertner
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 23:22:05 +1000 James Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 02:52:31PM +0200, A.J. Venter wrote: > > Hi, > > How much compatibility is broken between fpc-1.0.6 and fpc-laz 1.0.7 ? > > Why can't Lazarus be run with just the normal FPC compiler anyway ? Why >

Re: [fpc-pascal]Lazarus +FPC

2003-03-28 Thread Marco van de Voort
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 02:52:31PM +0200, A.J. Venter wrote: > > Hi, > > How much compatibility is broken between fpc-1.0.6 and fpc-laz 1.0.7 ? > > Why can't Lazarus be run with just the normal FPC compiler anyway ? Why > does it have to have a specially built compiler ? In general, there is no

Re: [fpc-pascal]Lazarus +FPC

2003-03-28 Thread James Mills
On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 02:52:31PM +0200, A.J. Venter wrote: > Hi, > How much compatibility is broken between fpc-1.0.6 and fpc-laz 1.0.7 ? Why can't Lazarus be run with just the normal FPC compiler anyway ? Why does it have to have a specially built compiler ? James _

Re: [fpc-pascal]Lazarus +FPC

2003-03-28 Thread Peter Vreman
> Hi, > How much compatibility is broken between fpc-1.0.6 and fpc-laz 1.0.7 ? Lazarus uses a recent 1.0.7 snapshot. The fpc-laz is just the 1.0.7 development version that will be the next 1.0.8 release > The reason I ask is that lazarus requires the latter, and I do not seem > to be able to comp

Re: [fpc-pascal]Lazarus +FPC

2003-03-28 Thread Jonas Maebe
On vrijdag, maa 28, 2003, at 13:52 Europe/Brussels, A.J. Venter wrote: How much compatibility is broken between fpc-1.0.6 and fpc-laz 1.0.7 ? Not too much hopefully, because the 1.0.x branch is the fixes branch. Normally, compatibility is only broken there if there was a bug which couldn't be (p

[fpc-pascal]Lazarus +FPC

2003-03-28 Thread A.J. Venter
Hi, How much compatibility is broken between fpc-1.0.6 and fpc-laz 1.0.7 ? The reason I ask is that lazarus requires the latter, and I do not seem to be able to compile any of my old freepascal programs with it. Is there some way to run Lazarus (for delphi style developement) while maintaining st