Am Freitag, 21. Juli 2006 20:00 schrieb Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho:
> AFAIK the solution to easely install a software on Linux is to use the
> native packages, like .rpm and .deb
The solution for fpc at this moment is quite ok. It does not have to be
graphical.
It can be improved for those who d
> On 21 Jul 2006, at 11:42, Marco van de Voort wrote:
> >
> > Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown
> > compiler directives. So
> > you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6)
>
> I think at least in this case GPC also matters, since Florian is also
> soliciting fe
On 7/21/06, Alexandre Leclerc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There is autopackage.org which is a very nice piece of work... but al
c/c++ centric.
If you look on google there are several statements from the main
developers of ubuntu, gentoo and other major distributions that say
horrible things abou
Is there not a standard by distributions which tells software the standard
place to install.
I have noticed different distributions seem to have different preferences. :-)
It seems there should be a file in /etc
which would have defined places for installation of software,
configuration informati
On 21 Jul 2006, at 11:42, Marco van de Voort wrote:
Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler
directives.
Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown
compiler directives. So
you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6)
I think at least in this c
> Marco van de Voort wrote:
> > Philosophically saying, that would enter the programmer into a purely
> > consumer relation with the OS. Which isn't the case in OSS, since there is
> > a
> > shared responsibility by all users, nobody excluded.
>
> You hit the point, except that it _is_ becoming th
Am Freitag, 21. Juli 2006 15:07 schrieb Micha Nelissen:
> Rainer Stratmann wrote:
> > Partly I agree, but, what has a good programmer to do with internals of
> > any os? That a programmer should be an intelligent person does not mean
> > that it could not be an advantage if fpc run "out of the box"
Marco van de Voort wrote:
>> > People don't dig into such stuff will be never good programmers, so I
>> > see no real problem if they give up :) Programming is full of such
>> > challenges.
>>
>> Partly I agree, but, what has a good programmer to do with internals of
>> any
>> os?
>
> Philosophical
Rainer Stratmann wrote:
> Partly I agree, but, what has a good programmer to do with internals of any
> os? That a programmer should be an intelligent person does not mean that it
> could not be an advantage if fpc run "out of the box".
What do you count as "internals" ? Surely the programmer sh
OK - I can see that. But, I personally am busy all the time, coding,
clients, life etc. I have released things here and there. I'm working on
something that I hope will eventually take a life on of its own - that is
TOTALLY FREEPASCAL.
I think Free Pascal is just the best language going - syntact
> > People don't dig into such stuff will be never good programmers, so I
> > see no real problem if they give up :) Programming is full of such
> > challenges.
>
> Partly I agree, but, what has a good programmer to do with internals of any
> os?
Philosophically saying, that would enter the prog
Am Donnerstag, 20. Juli 2006 22:41 schrieb Florian Klaempfl:
> Rainer Stratmann wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 20. Juli 2006 13:44 schrieb Jason P Sage:
> >> I know most of you know this stuff and it's a no brainer - but - I just
> >> wanted to say this because I see people having problems sometimes
> >
2006/7/20, Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Tomas Hajny wrote:
> On 20 Jul 06, at 22:41, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
>> Rainer Stratmann wrote:
>>> Am Donnerstag, 20. Juli 2006 13:44 schrieb Jason P Sage:
> .
> .
>>> In my view these "simple things" must have highest priority.
>>>
>>> In the L
> > Patch cprt0.as for your libc.
>
> The libc that my platform is using is micro libc, and unfortunately the micro
> libc is
> initialized the same way as libc.
> Does anyone have a hint?
objdump a helloworld C program, and investigate.
___
fpc-pas
Vinzent Höfler wrote:
Marco van de Voort wrote:
Marco van de Voort wrote:
new keywords.
Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler directives.
Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown compiler
directives. So
you
> Patch cprt0.as for your libc.
The libc that my platform is using is micro libc, and unfortunately the micro
libc is
initialized the same way as libc.
Does anyone have a hint?
Carsten
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
h
Marco van de Voort wrote:
Marco van de Voort wrote:
new keywords.
Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler directives.
Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown compiler
directives. So
you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6)
Does Delphi suppor
> Marco van de Voort wrote:
> >>> new keywords.
> >> Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler directives.
> >
> > Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown
> > compiler directives. So
> > you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6)
>
> Does Delphi su
Marco van de Voort wrote:
new keywords.
Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler directives.
Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown compiler
directives. So
you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6)
Does Delphi support FPC style macros? In t
John Coppens wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 21:11:49 +0200
Vinzent Höfler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Alan Burns? That's a name which rings a bell. You could have send the
URL, though. ;)
http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~burns/pf.html
Hmm, and taking a peek look at the examples, it doesn't really
> > new keywords.
>
> Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler directives.
Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown compiler
directives. So
you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6)
And then I prefer the clean syntax.
__
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 09:28:17 +1000
Steve Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marc Weustink wrote:
> >> One of the pretexts behind OpenMP is that the code will still compile
if
> >> OpenMP is not available or disabled on a particular compiler.
> >>
> >
> > Mwah... in that case you can stil
22 matches
Mail list logo
