I should clarify, foo is a virtual method of an object, not a regular
function. -b
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Bruce Tulloch wrote:
> After a random but very long period of time (i.e. very many successful
> calls) I get a SEGV in the built-in function fpc_AnsiStr_Decr_Ref.
>
> GDB reports
After a random but very long period of time (i.e. very many successful
calls) I get a SEGV in the built-in function fpc_AnsiStr_Decr_Ref.
GDB reports the argument to fpc_AnsiStr_Decr_Ref (the string who's
reference is to be decremented) is nil (i.e. 0x0).
Prima facie, that's the reason for the S
Oops,
2013/5/8 silvioprog
> [...]
> uses
> resolve, winsock;
>
> procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject);
> var
> FHostEntry: PHostEnt;
> begin
> FHostEntry := gethostbyname('www.google.com.br');
> end;
>
... gethostbyname('www.google.com') ...
--
Silvio Clécio
My public projects
Hello,
A friend from Brazil found a small problem in "resolve" unit.
Before execute the test:
http://imagebin.org/256886
After execute the test:
http://imagebin.org/256887
And the test is:
procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender : TObject);
begin
with TInetSocket.Create('www.google.com', 80)
On 08/05/13 00:01, Jonas Maebe wrote:
Cross compiling for Linux/x86_64 with
FPCMAKEOPT="-Fl/usr/lib/gcc/i686-linux-gnu/4.7" went past the previous error
point, but yet yielded another error:
./fpmake compile --localunitdir=.. --os=linux --cpu=x86_64 -o -Px86_64 -o
-XPx86_64-linux- -o -Xr -o -
On 07 May 2013, at 22:43, patspiper wrote:
> On 07/05/13 21:01, Jonas Maebe wrote:
>> That is by design. fpmake runs on the host, not on the target.
>> /home/user1/Programs/fpc/fpsrc/exported/2.7.1/compiler/ppc is a native
>> compiler (so i386->i386 in your case). Options specific to compiling
On 07/05/13 21:01, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 07 May 2013, at 19:27, patspiper wrote:
It is the other way round. My OS is 32 bit Ubuntu and one of the targets is
Linux/x86-64, so I assume you mean the 64 bit paths and not the 32 bit ones.
I tried setting CROSSOPT (CROSSOPT="-XR/usr/lib64
-Fl/usr/
Am 07.05.2013 18:17, schrieb patspiper:
>
> Cross compiler building is broken for FPC 2.7.1 on Ubuntu and Fedora. I
> had submitted a couple of bug reports and made several posts in this
> mailing list, but all went unnoticed or were not handled. I have almost
> lost hope.
These reports are not a
On 07 May 2013, at 19:27, patspiper wrote:
> It is the other way round. My OS is 32 bit Ubuntu and one of the targets is
> Linux/x86-64, so I assume you mean the 64 bit paths and not the 32 bit ones.
>
> I tried setting CROSSOPT (CROSSOPT="-XR/usr/lib64
> -Fl/usr/lib/gcc/i686-linux-gnu/4.7/64"
Linux/i386 (was: Win64 release of FPC 2.6.2 missing)">
On 07/05/13 19:34, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 07 May 2013, at 18:17, patspiper wrote:
Cross compiler building is broken for FPC 2.7.1 on Ubuntu and Fedora. I had
submitted a couple of bug reports and made several posts in this mailing list,
b
On 5/7/2013 02:38, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 07 May 2013, at 08:21, Eric Kom wrote:
Thanks for the respond! but without option OVERRIDEVERSIONCHECK is set,
another error occurred:
erickom@cloudTwo:~/freePascal27/fpc$ make NOGDB=1 OPT='-O- -gl -Xs-' all
Makefile:2704: *** The only supported starti
I learned from the free pascal wiki and installed the LazDaemon package.
I 'new' a project as a Daemon (Service) application.
However, when I compile it, it has many (dozens of) warnings e.g.
undefined reference to 'WSRegisterCustomPage',
'WSregisterCustomNotebook', 'WSRegisterCustomIamgeList'
On 07 May 2013, at 18:17, patspiper wrote:
> Cross compiler building is broken for FPC 2.7.1 on Ubuntu and Fedora. I had
> submitted a couple of bug reports and made several posts in this mailing
> list, but all went unnoticed or were not handled. I have almost lost hope.
>
> Bug reports:
> ht
On 07/05/13 09:33, Jonas Maebe wrote:
No, it goes: "nobody ever submitted a bug report about this nor posted anything on
the FPC mailing list and I don't use Windows myself, so this is the first I hear about
it". Problems need to be reported and fixed.
[...]
Every single person using the Mac
On 07 May 2013, at 13:15, Daniel Moore wrote:
I have not had bad experience with cross-compilers, as far as the
compilers not working as of yet. However, let me state for the
record, that a vast majority of the compiling that I will be doing
will be exclusively for 64-bit systems, and I s
On 5/6/2013 11:40 AM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
If I run 64-bit Mac or 64-bit Windows or 64-bit Linux, I want 64-bit
applications. Some OS's allow for easier execution of 32-bit apps, but
definitely not all. All my systems run 64-bit OS's, and all my
installed libraries etc are 64-bit too (thin
Hello.
I want add access to AT-SPI interface.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assistive_Technology_Service_Provider_Interface
Does it exist a pascal header for that ?
Does anybody know how to do it, via fpc, not lcl ?
Thanks.
_
Eric Kom wrote:
On 07/05/2013 10:12, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Eric Kom wrote:
Good day,
Compile failed.
Please see below the error/bug.
svn up
make clean
make OVERRIDEVERSIONCHECK=1 NOGDB=1 OPT='-O- -gl -Xs-' all
You've already posted that, this isn't a chatroom and you don't have
to repea
On 07/05/2013 10:12, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Eric Kom wrote:
Good day,
Compile failed.
Please see below the error/bug.
svn up
make clean
make OVERRIDEVERSIONCHECK=1 NOGDB=1 OPT='-O- -gl -Xs-' all
You've already posted that, this isn't a chatroom and you don't have
to repeat yourself.
I k
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
>
> And just to make it clear... it was NOT my idea to release my build of
> FPC 2.6.4 for 64-bit Windows. I was asked in private to archive what I
> have and make it available for download (on my own server). That is what
> I did.
It was the least
Eric Kom wrote:
Good day,
Compile failed.
Please see below the error/bug.
svn up
make clean
make OVERRIDEVERSIONCHECK=1 NOGDB=1 OPT='-O- -gl -Xs-' all
You've already posted that, this isn't a chatroom and you don't have to
repeat yourself.
Now *WHY* are you trying to compile with that over
Am 06.05.2013 18:40, schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
To put it simply, that is the reason I (and many others) need a 64-bit
FPC. I've had lots of bad experiences with FPC cross-compilers - from
installing headaches, to broken executables (don't ask me why, I don't
know why). So I simply don't trust FP
22 matches
Mail list logo
