Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-31 Thread Marco van de Voort
In our previous episode, Mark Morgan Lloyd said: > > You try to build with 2.6.1. > > That could very easily be misread as "You should try to build with > 2.6.1", correct idiomatic English would be "You are trying to build with > 2.6.1.", or to rub their nose in it "You are trying to build wit

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-31 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On 2012-10-31 07:09, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: > start it now.". If we're trying to make it "bloody idiot proof" then the > correct form is "you are trying" or "you have tried". That make sense. Could Marco or somebody update the grammar in that message? Regards, - Graeme -

[fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-31 Thread Reinier Olislagers
On 31-10-2012 8:09, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: > Sven Barth wrote: > I'm definitely not complaining about the check, I agree with it. But to > somebody with English as their first/only language "You try" is an > imperative, as in "I've cleared the bubbles in the fuel line, you try to > start it now."

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-31 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Sven Barth wrote: I really don't like making this comment, but looking at the bug report (and checking the current Makefile) > You try to build with 2.6.1. That could very easily be misread as "You should try to build with 2.6.1", correct idiomatic English would be "You are trying to build wi

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-30 Thread Sven Barth
On 30.10.2012 16:00, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: Mattias Gaertner wrote: Jonas Maebe hat am 30. Oktober 2012 um 14:44 geschrieben: On 17 Oct 2012, at 16:52, Marco van de Voort wrote: > > New text: D:\repo\fpc>make all makefile:2717: *** The only supported starting compiler ver

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-30 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Mattias Gaertner wrote: Jonas Maebe hat am 30. Oktober 2012 um 14:44 geschrieben: On 17 Oct 2012, at 16:52, Marco van de Voort wrote: > > New text: D:\repo\fpc>make all makefile:2717: *** The only supported starting compiler version is 2.6.0. You are trying to build wit

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-30 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On 2012-10-30 14:04, Mattias Gaertner wrote: >> (that person even manually >> edited the makefile and replaced the 2.6.0 with 2.7.1 trying to get around >> the >> check). Oh my f#*k! > "Programming today is a race between software engineers strivi

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-30 Thread Henry Vermaak
On 30/10/12 14:04, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > Rich Cook > "Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build > bigger > and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and > better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." Ah, you beat me to it :)

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-30 Thread Mattias Gaertner
Jonas Maebe hat am 30. Oktober 2012 um 14:44 geschrieben: > On 17 Oct 2012, at 16:52, Marco van de Voort wrote: > > > > > New text: > > > > D:\repo\fpc>make all > > makefile:2717: *** The only supported starting compiler version is > > 2.6.0. > > You are trying to build with

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-30 Thread Jonas Maebe
On 17 Oct 2012, at 16:52, Marco van de Voort wrote: New text: D:\repo\fpc>make all makefile:2717: *** The only supported starting compiler version is 2.6.0. You are trying to build with 2.7.1. If you are absolutely sure that the current compiler is built from the exact same version/revisio

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-18 Thread Mattias Gaertner
Marco van de Voort hat am 18. Oktober 2012 um 13:41 geschrieben: > In our previous episode, Mattias Gaertner said: > > > I disagree. To prevent any strange side-effects (undefined behaviour), > > > the version check should happen as early as possible - before any > > > compiling commences. > > >

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-18 Thread Marco van de Voort
In our previous episode, Mattias Gaertner said: > > I disagree. To prevent any strange side-effects (undefined behaviour), > > the version check should happen as early as possible - before any > > compiling commences. > > I'm compiling fpc trunk with trunk/fixes/release since years. It works more

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-18 Thread Mattias Gaertner
Graeme Geldenhuys hat am 17. Oktober 2012 um 17:05 geschrieben: > On 2012-10-17 15:57, Vincent Snijders wrote: > > > > Alternatively, it could just be a warning. Then if it fails later, the > > complete output will show the reason. > > > I disagree. To prevent any strange side-effects (undefined

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-17 Thread Marco van de Voort
In our previous episode, Vincent Snijders said: > > I thought about the 2.6.0<->2.6.2 transition, but it is easy to temporarily > > wrap another version check around it for a few weeks. More work, but not a > > problem. (just needs documentation in rel_eng) > > Alternatively, it could just be a wa

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-17 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On 2012-10-17 15:57, Vincent Snijders wrote: > > Alternatively, it could just be a warning. Then if it fails later, the > complete output will show the reason. I disagree. To prevent any strange side-effects (undefined behaviour), the version check should happen as early as possible - before any

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-17 Thread Vincent Snijders
2012/10/17 Marco van de Voort : > D:\repo\fpc>make all > makefile:2717: *** The only supported starting compiler version is 2.6.0. > You are trying to build with 2.7.1. If you are absolutely sure that the > current > compiler is built from the exact same version/revision, you can try to use > OVER

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-17 Thread Marco van de Voort
In our previous episode, Jonas Maebe said: > > OVERRIDEVERSIONCHECK=1 whenever you build a cross-compiler. Even > > more: it will suggest that building a cross-compiler should also be > > done starting with the latest release, while in fact it they should > > be built using a native compiler

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-17 Thread Marco van de Voort
In our previous episode, Jonas Maebe said: > > It is kept simple on purpose. Only works on toplevel makefile (easy to > > maintain), only on the toplevel "all" target, the required version > > is also > > kept there (toplevel Makefile.fpc as only place). > > I think it's annoying that you then h

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-17 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On 2012-10-17 13:54, Jonas Maebe wrote: > ...whenever you build a cross-compiler. Even more: it will suggest that > building a cross-compiler should also be done starting with the latest... Simply update the error message to say that the version check rules might not apply to newly implemented pl

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-17 Thread Jonas Maebe
On 17 Oct 2012, at 14:54, Jonas Maebe wrote: I think it's annoying that you then have to type OVERRIDEVERSIONCHECK=1 whenever you build a cross-compiler. Even more: it will suggest that building a cross-compiler should also be done starting with the latest release, while in fact it they sh

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-17 Thread Jonas Maebe
On 17 Oct 2012, at 13:43, Marco van de Voort wrote: It is kept simple on purpose. Only works on toplevel makefile (easy to maintain), only on the toplevel "all" target, the required version is also kept there (toplevel Makefile.fpc as only place). I think it's annoying that you then have t

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-17 Thread Marco van de Voort
In our previous episode, Reinier Olislagers said: > > work-in-progress. > > > > So saying "if it won't compile with stable then sod off" isn't helpful. > > Mark, I understand what you mean. > > Regardless of the way Graeme put his point, I think having: > - a rough check on latest stable compile

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-17 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On 2012-10-17 12:43, Marco van de Voort wrote: > > It is kept simple on purpose. Only works on toplevel makefile (easy to > maintain), only on the toplevel "all" target, the required version is also > kept there (toplevel Makefile.fpc as only place). Nice, works perfectly here under 64-bit Linux

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-17 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Reinier Olislagers wrote: On 17-10-2012 12:49, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: On 2012-10-17 10:10, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: Some slack would be desirable: stable is 2.6.0 but there are known issues which are fixed by 2.6.1. Nope, the FPC developers made the rules quite clea

[fpc-pascal] Re: problems compiling FPC

2012-10-17 Thread Reinier Olislagers
On 17-10-2012 12:49, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: > Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: >> On 2012-10-17 10:10, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: >>> Some slack would be desirable: stable is 2.6.0 but there are known >>> issues which are fixed by 2.6.1. >> >> Nope, the FPC developers made the rules quite clear! Not even t