Reiner,
You can certainly do this with IBX for Lazarus
(http://www.mwasoftware.co.uk). You will also find there some guidelines
on using the Firebird embedded library under both Windows and Linux that
are more general than just IBX.
If you want to stick with SQLDB then there is a global variable
On 1 August 2011 15:09, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>>
>> http://code.google.com/speed/webp/
>
> Not yet. But it looks very interesting.
It does indeed. I'm continuing work on adding FPImage support to
fpGUI, and was curious about WebP because I read an article on it
recently.
--
Regards,
-
On 1 August 2011 16:32, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> If you really want the application running 100% of the time, there are only
> 2 options:
> - fastcgi with mod_fastcgi (NOT mod_fcgid) and ExternalFastCGIServer option.
> - Embedded server (i;e. the application acts as a webserver).
...and opti
On 3-8-2011 9:48, Tony Whyman wrote:
> Reiner,
>
> You can certainly do this with IBX for Lazarus
> (http://www.mwasoftware.co.uk). You will also find there some guidelines
> on using the Firebird embedded library under both Windows and Linux that
> are more general than just IBX.
>
> If you want
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
> >
> > Not yet. But it looks very interesting.
>
> It does indeed. I'm continuing work on adding FPImage support to
> fpGUI, and was curious about WebP because I read an article on it
> recently.
If you look around a bit you see also a lot of crit
> -Message d'origine-
> De : fpc-pascal-boun...@lists.freepascal.org
> [mailto:fpc-pascal-boun...@lists.freepascal.org] De la part
> de Marco van de Voort
> Envoyé : mercredi 3 août 2011 11:37
> À : FPC-Pascal users discussions
> Objet : Re: [fpc-pascal] FPImage and WebP support
>
>
>
On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
When using the Firebird embedded database, it's nice to be able to
create the database using only FreePascal/Lazarus.
Why do you think this is not possible ? The CreateDB method of TIBConnection
does exactly that.
I've been using it for years.
Actually, my preference for creating a database in a deployed
application is to first create it on my local system using isql with
input from a script and then to save it using gbak in a portable
format. The TIBRestoreService is then used to create the database from
the backup archive when your pr
On 3-8-2011 11:50, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
>
>> When using the Firebird embedded database, it's nice to be able to
>> create the database using only FreePascal/Lazarus.
>
> Why do you think this is not possible ? The CreateDB method of
> TI
In our previous episode, Reinier Olislagers said:
> > TObject?
> >
>
> Does anybody have a suggestion on how to use ftVarbytes fields or aren't
> they supported in FPC?
Afaik currently mostly ftblob is used for variable binary storage. I'm not
entirely sure what the difference is?
__
On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Tony Whyman wrote:
Actually, my preference for creating a database in a deployed
application is to first create it on my local system using isql with
input from a script and then to save it using gbak in a portable
format. The TIBRestoreService is then used to create the d
On 3-8-2011 12:05, Tony Whyman wrote:
> Actually, my preference for creating a database in a deployed
> application is to first create it on my local system using isql with
> input from a script and then to save it using gbak in a portable
> format. The TIBRestoreService is then used to create the
Michael,
I will concede that backup/restore is vulnerable to rubbish in/rubbish
out errors. But then if you don't test your backup before distribution
On 03/08/11 11:21, michael.vancann...@wisa.be wrote:
>
> As for backup/restore being robust: this is not 100% correct. It is
> extremely easy
On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Tony Whyman wrote:
Michael,
I will concede that backup/restore is vulnerable to rubbish in/rubbish
out errors. But then if you don't test your backup before distribution
Yes, of course.
We have checklists and procedures for that when we do updates :-)
I just wante
> On 2-8-2011 7:39, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
> > I've got trouble finding out how to fill and retrieve data for a
> > ftVarBytes field in a TBufDataset.
> >
> > .AsString doesn't seem to work well - if I fill it with the
> string How
> > do I fill this field? I get back
> > How
> >
> > I tr
I understand now what you are doing and would agree that for a simple
demo, you really do want to create the DB in code. I am thinking more
about distributing and supporting a fully supported application.
Interesting that I seemed to get so much push-back when I suggested isql
- I did so as a simp
On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Tony Whyman wrote:
I understand now what you are doing and would agree that for a simple
demo, you really do want to create the DB in code. I am thinking more
about distributing and supporting a fully supported application.
Interesting that I seemed to get so much push-bac
On 3-8-2011 12:38, Tony Whyman wrote:
> I understand now what you are doing and would agree that for a simple
> demo, you really do want to create the DB in code. I am thinking more
> about distributing and supporting a fully supported application.
>
> Interesting that I seemed to get so much push
On 3-8-2011 12:32, Ludo Brands wrote:
>> On 2-8-2011 7:39, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
>>> I've got trouble finding out how to fill and retrieve data for a
>>> ftVarBytes field in a TBufDataset.
>>> TestDataset.FieldByName('ftVarBytes').Asstring := Teststring;
>>> writeln('ftVarbytes.AsString: '
Hi,
I searched the FPC Programmer's Guide and Users Guide, and nowhere is
there a definitional of description explaining the difference.
So here is to anybody that knows: What is the difference between a
target x86-64, target x86_64 and a target x64?
eg:
Here is the output of my FPC compiler un
Hi,
I know when deploying an application, it is always best to be
conservative with the compiler optimization options - thus your
application can run on most CPU's out there (maximum compatibility).
But what is the best optimization options I can specify for my own
system. This includes FPC itsel
On 3 August 2011 11:36, Marco van de Voort wrote:
>
> If you look around a bit you see also a lot of criticism. On the results of
> Google's tests, and the incompleteness of the reference implementation.
> ...
> And of course browser support is still seriously lacking.
None the less it is still in
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
> I searched the FPC Programmer's Guide and Users Guide, and nowhere is
> there a definitional of description explaining the difference.
>
> So here is to anybody that knows: What is the difference between a
> target x86-64, target x86_64 and a targ
On 03 Aug 2011, at 14:11, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
So here is to anybody that knows: What is the difference between a
target x86-64, target x86_64 and a target x64?
None. The target names are simple strings in the compiler/i_*.pas
files and unrelated to the code generation.
Jonas
___
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
> > Google's tests, and the incompleteness of the reference implementation.
> > ...
> > And of course browser support is still seriously lacking.
>
> None the less it is still interesting. Google trying to bring a new
> image format into today's tim
Hi list,
I'm looking into converting a half-finished small timekeeping/billing
application of mine from .Net to Lazarus/Freepascal. It runs on SQL
Server 2008.
I'm thinking about trying to separate out the database layer (using
something like tiOPF perhaps) from the presentation layer.
I could t
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 6:51 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys
wrote:
> On 1 August 2011 16:32, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>>
>> If you really want the application running 100% of the time, there are only
>> 2 options:
>> - fastcgi with mod_fastcgi (NOT mod_fcgid) and ExternalFastCGIServer option.
>> - Embedde
You can use L7 filtering to select actions based on packet content.
2011/8/1 Andrew Brunner :
> The only thing I can think of would be packet inspection. Firewalls
> included with Linux and Windows do not perform "deep" packet
> inspection. They only allow/deny packets with specific ports over
>
In our previous episode, Andrew Brunner said:
> The only thing I can think of would be packet inspection. Firewalls
> included with Linux and Windows do not perform "deep" packet
> inspection. They only allow/deny packets with specific ports over
> either TCP or UDP.
Usually they deny all ports
On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
Hi list,
I'm looking into converting a half-finished small timekeeping/billing
application of mine from .Net to Lazarus/Freepascal. It runs on SQL
Server 2008.
I'm thinking about trying to separate out the database layer (using
something like tiO
30 matches
Mail list logo
