On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Ben wrote:
> Maybe FPC could adopt a similar release schedule as many open source
> projects do these days - like what was started by Ubuntu. Have a set
> timeframe or months that releases will happen on.
Even commercial companies have difficulty following this mo
In our previous episode, Ben said:
> That is excellent news knowing that it is still possible this year. That
> gives some target to plan towards.
> > That's always the case, and the meaning of "trunk". But trunk first has to
> > reach stability, both for usage, as for release building to be rel
On 10/05/2011 12:58, Marco van de Voort wrote:
>
> 2.6.0 is after that. Dates are difficult, specially with major
releases, but
> I'd guess somewhere late this year. (october-december)
That is excellent news knowing that it is still possible this year. That
gives some target to plan towards.
> T
In our previous episode, Frank Church said:
> I tried to build FreePascal 2.5.1 using FPC 2.4.2 and when it comes to
> generating the .fpc.cfg using samplecfg there is an error message about -p
> option not present.
Rule of thumb, if you use some script or other tool from a repository, you
must al
I tried to build FreePascal 2.5.1 using FPC 2.4.2 and when it comes to
generating the .fpc.cfg using samplecfg there is an error message about -p
option not present.
rchurch@serverone:~$ fpcmkcfg --help
> Error: Unknown option.--help
> Usage: fpcmkcfg [options]
> Where options is one or more of
>
In our previous episode, Ben said:
> Is there any roadmap / time frame / estimate / thumb suck date /
> for the next major FPC release - thus a release based on Trunk?
2.4.4 is already uploaded, and its release only waits for some server problems
to be
sorted out.
2.6.0 is after that. Dates are
Hi,
Is there any roadmap / time frame / estimate / thumb suck date /
for the next major FPC release - thus a release based on Trunk?
There are a few features in Trunk for some time now (ie: huge
improvements to Interface usage and many more) that are not available in
the latest stable 2.4.2.
I
If you want to make a network agnostic api you should define it at a higher
level than you started to do. Something on a stream level. If you need the
lower level socket calls, stick to the standard Berkeley socket API and
don't re-invent the wheel. Fe: listen with port and ip parameter just to get
In our previous episode, Frank Church said:
> It looks like it will be better if the samplecfg uses the fpcmkcfg created
> with the new build. Has it been updated since the 2005 date it was created?
See SVN log? Note that the upcoming 2.4.4 is roughly the state of March 1st,
and will thus use r167
