Recent

Author Topic: FPCUp FPC/Lazarus SVN installer/updater for Windows, Linux, OSX, FreeBSD... 2  (Read 109363 times)

DonAlfredo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1324
Another install update for deploying projects on BBB running Arch Linux hardfloat.

CodeTyphon is a nice IDE, based on FPC and Lazarus, with lots of utilities.
Unfortunately, I could not get it to crosscompile from Win8 to BBB.
(wrong EABI-version, errors on scrollbars, ...)

Solution: use the binutils from Reiniero, and make some changes to a script.

Install a clean CodeTyphon.
http://www.pilotlogic.com/sitejoom/index.php/downloads/viewcategory/30-codetyphon

Copy the arm-linux directory from Reiniero's binutils to CodeTyphon "binToolchains/win32-arm-linux--eabi5" directory.
https://bitbucket.org/reiniero/fpcup/downloads/CrossFPC_binutils_libs.7z

Make the following changes to the script "x_FPC_Build_Cross.bat" inside "ScriptsWin/Crossbuild":


Inside Stage 1:
START /D C:\codetyphon\fpcsrc\ /B /WAIT C:\codetyphon\fpc\bin\%2\make.exe all CPU_TARGET=%4 OS_TARGET=%5 BINUTILSPREFIX=%4-%5- OPT="-dFPC_ARMHF" FPC=%3.exe

Inside stage 2:
START /D C:\codetyphon\fpcsrc\ /B /WAIT C:\codetyphon\fpc\bin\%2\make.exe -C rtl clean CPU_TARGET=%4 OS_TARGET=%5 BINUTILSPREFIX=%4-%5- OPT="-dFPC_ARMHF" FPC=%6.exe
START /D C:\codetyphon\fpcsrc\ /B /WAIT C:\codetyphon\fpc\bin\%2\make.exe -C packages clean CPU_TARGET=%4 OS_TARGET=%5 BINUTILSPREFIX=%4-%5- OPT="-dFPC_ARMHF" FPC=%6.exe
START /D C:\codetyphon\fpcsrc\ /B /WAIT C:\codetyphon\fpc\bin\%2\make.exe rtl packages CPU_TARGET=%4 OS_TARGET=%5 BINUTILSPREFIX=%4-%5- OPT="-dFPC_ARMHF" FPC=%6.exe

As you can see, in fact, 4 very simple changes: add OPT="-dFPC_ARMHF" to enable hardfloat.
(I use Arch Linux hardfloat for the BBB).

Run CodeTyphon (control center) as Administrator, goto CrossBuild / FreePascal and run "build cross element arm-linux--eabi5".

When using Typhon to build a BBB project, use the same compiler options & settings & library path as when using fpcup for BBB on Arch (described in a previous message).

Again, this worked for me, for a BBB running Arch Linux.
I hope it will work for you too !

BigChimp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5740
  • Add to the wiki - it's free ;)
    • FPCUp, PaperTiger scanning and other open source projects
(I also include CROSSOPT="-Caeabihf -Cparmv7 -CfVFPv3", but I do not know if this is strictly necessary).
Mmm, setting those in Lazarus probably won't have any effect. AFAIU, CROSSOPT is only used when building an FPC cross compiler, not when running the FPC cross compiler.
You could set them as regular options.

Did try to set -Caeabihf as CROSSOPT when building FPC and it failed; turns out only DEFAULT and EABI are permitted by the cross arm compiler.

Currently fiddling with trying to get things working correctly on fpcup. Work in progress settings.ini:
Code: [Select]
[linuxarm]
; builds on win32 quick: ARM Linux cross compiler (e.g. raspberry pi)
; a full fpcup run must have been done before (e.g. win32full)
; does not update packages
fpcdir=c:\development\fpctrunk
fpcurl=http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/trunk
lazdir=c:\development\lazarus
primary-config-path=c:\development\lazarussettings
fpcopt=""
fpcuplinkname=""
lazlinkname=""
binutilsdir=c:\development\fpcbootstrap
fpcbootstrapdir=c:\development\fpcbootstrap
noconfirm=true
keeplocalchanges=true
cputarget=arm
; safe default but slow:
; crossopt="-CpARMV6 -CaEABI -CfSOFT"
; todo: look into LIBGCC fpu instruction set

; Raspberry Pi safe
; ARMv6 instruction set
; if using arm hf (hard float/floating point), also specify -dFPC_ARMHF to avoid gtk scrollbar errors
; -fPIC?
crossopt="-CpARMV6 -CaEABI -CfVFPV2 -dFPC_ARMHF"
; beagleboard black with hardfloat:
; if using armhf, also specify -dFPC_ARMHF to avoid gtk scrollbar errors
;crossopt="-fPIC -CaEABI -Cparmv7 -CfVFPv3 -dFPC_ARMHF"
ostarget=linux
; we only need to do Lazarus as FPC won't change here
; FPCCleanOnly
only=FPCBuildOnly
skip=FPCGetOnly,lazbuild,bigide,useride

Suggestions/corrections welcome, of course ;)
Want quicker answers to your questions? Read http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_Faq#What_is_the_correct_way_to_ask_questions_in_the_forum.3F

Open source including papertiger OCR/PDF scanning:
https://bitbucket.org/reiniero

Lazarus trunk+FPC trunk x86, Windows x64 unless otherwise specified

vfclists

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 827
    • HowTos Considered Harmful?
Reply to http://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php?action=post;quote=137921;topic=23075.15;last_msg=137944

@reiniero Have you considered moving this topic to the http://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/board,3.0.html sub forum under General or Linux or even created a sub forum for FPCUp there?
I don't think there's any net benefits.
- People are already confused about what the official installer is
- IMO they are not more likely to suddenly starting to follow troubleshooting steps and providing log output by themselves
- external docs reference this forum

As for subforums: I think there are too many already - people already post in the "wrong" category... but people still manage to help, regardless of which forum they're posted in.

I have to disagree for the reasons below

Original announcement is 2 years old

The original announcement has morphed into a 2 year old support thread with 423 replies. Once announcements are made they are supposed to drop off and let new announcements rise to the top. But FPCUp is always rising to the top because of it is regularly getting latest replies. The thread for the first release is in the top 10 on the page and dates from February 2012 yet announcements made in mid December 2013 don't even show on the first page.

I think it is better to move both threads  to the Installation forum and recreate the announcements with a link to the original threads  and close them else people will continue to post to into the announcements threads for support.

Other Information Sources

Another thing is that many of the problems in using FPCUp may not be in FPCUp at all and leaving the thread here has the side effect of diverting FPCUp users attention from another potential source of help. I only noticed the Installation sub forum because I suspected that there had to be another sub forum where installation was discussed. A question I asked after needing to move a successful FPCUp created compilation to a separate computer was clearly an installation related issue and didn't belong in the General forum.

The other benefit is having separate threads for questions. A person asking a question may notice that a similar questions have been asked before and will learn more about their issue and may even find the question already answered.

Sub Forum

There is a General sub forum under the Installation forum which is more than 10 years old and has 226 questions with 1123 replies. If in 2 years FPCUp has gained over 450 replies with only  2 questions then it warrants a separate sub forum. Plead with the moderators and see what they can do.

The same probably goes for fpGUI (Graeme hint,hint :))
Windows - Lazarus 1.0.8/FPC 2.6.0
Linux - Lazarus 1.4.4 /FPC 2.6.4

BigChimp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5740
  • Add to the wiki - it's free ;)
    • FPCUp, PaperTiger scanning and other open source projects
I have to disagree for the reasons below
I'm going to be blunt here: I'm sorry to say you're not the one developing the program and giving support. If you want to provide support on subforums etc, please be my guest.
Want quicker answers to your questions? Read http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_Faq#What_is_the_correct_way_to_ask_questions_in_the_forum.3F

Open source including papertiger OCR/PDF scanning:
https://bitbucket.org/reiniero

Lazarus trunk+FPC trunk x86, Windows x64 unless otherwise specified

BigChimp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5740
  • Add to the wiki - it's free ;)
    • FPCUp, PaperTiger scanning and other open source projects
Just committed a version with win32/win64=>linux arm cross compiler support. (Edit: should actually be quite easy to modify to also do linux x86/x64=>linux arm)
It compiles FPCUP ok (including nogui LCL widgetset) but gives a segfault on my emulated raspberry pi (nod to avra... ;) )
I've set up settings.ini so it should be easily adaptable for beagleboard black etc.

Snippet from settings.ini that describes what I'm doing:
Code: [Select]
[linuxarm]
; builds on win32 quick: ARM Linux cross compiler (e.g. raspberry pi)
; a full fpcup run must have been done before (e.g. win32full)
; does not update packages
fpcdir=c:\development\fpctrunk
fpcurl=http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/trunk
lazdir=c:\development\lazarus
primary-config-path=c:\development\lazarussettings
fpcopt=""
fpcuplinkname=""
lazlinkname=""
binutilsdir=c:\development\fpcbootstrap
fpcbootstrapdir=c:\development\fpcbootstrap
noconfirm=true
keeplocalchanges=true
cputarget=arm
; safe default but slow:
;crossopt="-CpARMV6 -CaEABI -CfSOFT"
; todo: look into LIBGCC fpu instruction set

; Raspberry Pi safe
; ARMv6 instruction set
; if using arm hf (hard float/floating point), also specify -dFPC_ARMHF to avoid gtk scrollbar errors
; copy over /lib, /usr/lib
; /usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf (Raspbian)
; perhaps /lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/ which seems to contain rewrite rules for the linker
; also /usr/lib/gcc/arm-linux-gnueabihf/4.6/ (change version number if using different version)
; etc
; to cross lib dir (try compiling and keep copying until no errors left)
;some .so files are actually scripts; check
;grep -i "ld script" *
;Remove those .so and copy over (or symlink) the .so.x to .so in order for the linker to find them
;Examples:
;libpthread.so
;libc.so
;libgcc_s.so
crossopt="-fPIC -CpARMV6 -CaEABI -CfVFPV2 -dFPC_ARMHF"

; beagleboard black with hardfloat:
; if using armhf, also specify -dFPC_ARMHF to avoid gtk scrollbar errors
;crossopt="-fPIC -CaEABI -Cparmv7 -CfVFPv3 -dFPC_ARMHF"
ostarget=linux
; we only need to do Lazarus as FPC won't change here
; FPCCleanOnly
only=FPCBuildOnly
skip=FPCGetOnly,lazbuild,bigide,useride

Any help gratefully accepted.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2014, 07:53:03 pm by BigChimp »
Want quicker answers to your questions? Read http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_Faq#What_is_the_correct_way_to_ask_questions_in_the_forum.3F

Open source including papertiger OCR/PDF scanning:
https://bitbucket.org/reiniero

Lazarus trunk+FPC trunk x86, Windows x64 unless otherwise specified

vfclists

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 827
    • HowTos Considered Harmful?
I am trying to be as polite as possible and you brush me off as though my case is very clear to everyone here.

I have deliberately not raised this issue for over 2 years because I have always considered it something for the moderators to handle and it is not for me to assume their role. If they are too busy with other things then perhaps it is time of end users to set out their ideas in what should be considered good manners in how posts to this forum are organized.

You have deliberately stripped out my response because it is an entirely reasonable one whose sense you don't want others to notice. Not only that I have given sound pragmatic reasons as to why a separate sub forum or separate threads will be better.

What is wrong with asking for the moderators for a sub forum or asking those requiring support to post separate FPCUp tagged questions if the moderators deny a sub forum request?

Should I also get personal and be blunt and tell you why I think you are doing things this way?

And please, being the author of a program doesn't entitle you to be impolite to users you don't agree with it, and in this case the disagreement is not about the program itself.

I have to disagree for the reasons below
I'm going to be blunt here: I'm sorry to say you're not the one developing the program and giving support. If you want to provide support on subforums etc, please be my guest.
Windows - Lazarus 1.0.8/FPC 2.6.0
Linux - Lazarus 1.4.4 /FPC 2.6.4

BigChimp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5740
  • Add to the wiki - it's free ;)
    • FPCUp, PaperTiger scanning and other open source projects
I am trying to be as polite as possible and you brush me off as though my case is very clear to everyone here.
No, the point I'm trying to make is that it's not your opinion that counts here, it's my opinion. It's my time, my support effort and I'm providing this for free as a courtesy to users to help them.
If I prefer to have things in a single thread, well, IMO, I'm entitled to it.

As I said in my reply I think the net benefits of a move are not worth it. I didn't say there were no possible benefits.

I have deliberately not raised this issue for over 2 years because I have always considered it something for the moderators to handle and it is not for me to assume their role. If they are too busy with other things then perhaps it is time of end users to set out their ideas in what should be considered good manners in how posts to this forum are organized.
There's generally accepted netiquette. IMO one of the elements of that is that you don't tell other people what to do unless you pay them or have some kind of authority relationship/contract.
If you have a problem with my posts I suggest you do contact the mods and don't wait 2 years. These things rarely improve with age.

You have deliberately stripped out my response because it is an entirely reasonable one whose sense you don't want others to notice. Not only that I have given sound pragmatic reasons as to why a separate sub forum or separate threads will be better.
I'm sorry, but your post is above mine, there for anybody to see. Quoting irrelevant swathes of text is bad netiquette.

What is wrong with asking for the moderators for a sub forum or asking those requiring support to post separate FPCUp tagged questions if the moderators deny a sub forum request?
Nothing in itself. It's just that I'm not interested in it (and no idea what this tagging is you're talking about). Our opinions differ.

Should I also get personal and be blunt and tell you why I think you are doing things this way?
I am not really interested in your opinion. I'm not stopping you though.

And please, being the author of a program doesn't entitle you to be impolite to users you don't agree with it, and in this case the disagreement is not about the program itself.
Well, you try telling me repeatedly what I should do. IMO it's you who started to be impolite.

That said, if you think the moderators should decide that this thread should be moved somewhere, by all means let them know.
Want quicker answers to your questions? Read http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_Faq#What_is_the_correct_way_to_ask_questions_in_the_forum.3F

Open source including papertiger OCR/PDF scanning:
https://bitbucket.org/reiniero

Lazarus trunk+FPC trunk x86, Windows x64 unless otherwise specified

vfclists

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 827
    • HowTos Considered Harmful?
Since you seem to enjoy a good scrap I am going to give you one and I probably should have done so from the very start and not waste mine and other viewers.

You are being selfish and inconsiderate and it is not about netiquette or how you give support for your program, but where you give support for your program. The Announcements forum is exactly what it says. It is an Announcements forum you see. ' A  N  N  O  U  N  C  E  M  E  N  T  S'. Do you see the anything there suggesting that it is the place for a  Support  thread? Of course you don't.

Any users who announce new items deserve their product to be shown for a few days or until the next one shows up. Users of this forum don't have the time or opportunity to visit every subforum. They just come to the main page and move on. By having replies come to the top of the main forum page other announcements don't get the exposure they should get if support related replies to your program keeps pushing them off. 423 replies in 2 years means FPCUp has been coming to the top at least every other day at the expense of newer announcements.

What is so special about your program that entitles you to do that when there is a forum and sub forum created exactly that purpose. SHOCK, HORROR  :o., the sub forum contains fpcup related questions.

You are entitled to have all support issues for your program asked in single thread, but why should that thread be in the Announcements forum?

Strictly speaking every announcement should be in a single item, then a separate Further Queries thread created and linked to from the main announcement which should be closed to new replies, or only for the OP to make some amendments to it.

I am not going to ask the moderators to move the thread as you are intelligent enough to see the sense in what I am asking. You seem to be one of those guys who treats a difference of opinion or a suggestion as a personal challenge or threat.  Get over that. It doesn't help in an open forum.

I tried asking you as tactfully as I could and you had to make it this way.

The simple reason is you have been and are still trying to exploit the placement of the Announcements forum and the fact of your name being linked to the latest replies to gain maximum publicity for yourself and it is why replied to my suggestion the way you did. You shouldn't think you are fooling anybody about your motive. It is plain for everyone to see.

For those who are interested the first response related to this issue is http://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,23075.msg137877.html#msg137877 and the following http://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,23075.msg137981.html#msg137981.

Interested parties can view it and judge for themselves.

I am trying to be as polite as possible and you brush me off as though my case is very clear to everyone here.
No, the point I'm trying to make is that it's not your opinion that counts here, it's my opinion. It's my time, my support effort and I'm providing this for free as a courtesy to users to help them.
If I prefer to have things in a single thread, well, IMO, I'm entitled to it.

As I said in my reply I think the net benefits of a move are not worth it. I didn't say there were no possible benefits.

I have deliberately not raised this issue for over 2 years because I have always considered it something for the moderators to handle and it is not for me to assume their role. If they are too busy with other things then perhaps it is time of end users to set out their ideas in what should be considered good manners in how posts to this forum are organized.
There's generally accepted netiquette. IMO one of the elements of that is that you don't tell other people what to do unless you pay them or have some kind of authority relationship/contract.
If you have a problem with my posts I suggest you do contact the mods and don't wait 2 years. These things rarely improve with age.

You have deliberately stripped out my response because it is an entirely reasonable one whose sense you don't want others to notice. Not only that I have given sound pragmatic reasons as to why a separate sub forum or separate threads will be better.
I'm sorry, but your post is above mine, there for anybody to see. Quoting irrelevant swathes of text is bad netiquette.

What is wrong with asking for the moderators for a sub forum or asking those requiring support to post separate FPCUp tagged questions if the moderators deny a sub forum request?
Nothing in itself. It's just that I'm not interested in it (and no idea what this tagging is you're talking about). Our opinions differ.

Should I also get personal and be blunt and tell you why I think you are doing things this way?
I am not really interested in your opinion. I'm not stopping you though.

And please, being the author of a program doesn't entitle you to be impolite to users you don't agree with it, and in this case the disagreement is not about the program itself.
Well, you try telling me repeatedly what I should do. IMO it's you who started to be impolite.

That said, if you think the moderators should decide that this thread should be moved somewhere, by all means let them know.
Windows - Lazarus 1.0.8/FPC 2.6.0
Linux - Lazarus 1.4.4 /FPC 2.6.4

BigChimp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5740
  • Add to the wiki - it's free ;)
    • FPCUp, PaperTiger scanning and other open source projects
fpcup.exe --cputarget="arm" --ostarget="linux" --fpcURL="2.7.1" --lazURL="1.3" --fpcOPT="-dFPC_ARMHF"

I found out (the hard, very time consuming way) that the "-dFPC_ARMHF" is necessary to prevent access violation errors from scrollbars on arm in gtk2 !!!!

Include "-dFPC_ARMHF" in your project options (Compiler Options / Other / Custom options).
(I also include CROSSOPT="-Caeabihf -Cparmv7 -CfVFPv3", but I do not know if this is strictly necessary).
Ah, got some help on the mailing list: turns out -Caeabihf is indeed valid but it only works if you specify -dFPC_ARMHF as part of FPCOPT - as DonAlfredo does above.
I had started pushing -dFPC_ARMHF only into CROSSOPT, which is why it didn't work for me.
so this snippet works - at least for generating a cross compiler; haven't tested whether compiled applications work on the pi yet:
Code: [Select]
[linuxarm]
...
; if using armhf, you mUST specify -dFPC_ARMHF in the FPC options;
; specifying in crossopt is not enough.
fpcopt="-fPIC -dFPC_ARMHF"
....
; raspberry pi example
crossopt="-CpARMV6 -CaEABIHF -CfVFPV2"
Thanks again, DonAlfredo!

Edit: see http://lists.freepascal.org/lists/fpc-devel/2013-May/032093.html
which indicates that you only have to specify -dFPC_ARMHF when building the cross compiler, not when using it to compile for ARM.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2014, 11:37:07 am by BigChimp »
Want quicker answers to your questions? Read http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_Faq#What_is_the_correct_way_to_ask_questions_in_the_forum.3F

Open source including papertiger OCR/PDF scanning:
https://bitbucket.org/reiniero

Lazarus trunk+FPC trunk x86, Windows x64 unless otherwise specified

DonAlfredo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1324
Good news !

And I would like to thank you for the additional info and research.

At the moment, I am trying to get the combi fpcup / android / arm / lclcustomdraw running !
With the newest SDK and NDK.
Again crosscompiling from Windows 8.1 to my Samsung SIII.

Not working 100%, but still trying.
(with native controls [from Simon Choi] already running sometimes, but not LCL).

Keep on the good work !

BigChimp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5740
  • Add to the wiki - it's free ;)
    • FPCUp, PaperTiger scanning and other open source projects
Great. Very interested in what you find out (so I can steal your work again ;) ). Let me know if I can help with the fpcup part/what goes wrong if you want to.
Want quicker answers to your questions? Read http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_Faq#What_is_the_correct_way_to_ask_questions_in_the_forum.3F

Open source including papertiger OCR/PDF scanning:
https://bitbucket.org/reiniero

Lazarus trunk+FPC trunk x86, Windows x64 unless otherwise specified

BigChimp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5740
  • Add to the wiki - it's free ;)
    • FPCUp, PaperTiger scanning and other open source projects
FPCUp  with Windows=>Linux ARM (e.g. Raspberry Pi, Raspbian) cross compiler support uploaded (Windows versions only)

See
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/fpcup#Linux_ARM_cross_compiler
Want quicker answers to your questions? Read http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_Faq#What_is_the_correct_way_to_ask_questions_in_the_forum.3F

Open source including papertiger OCR/PDF scanning:
https://bitbucket.org/reiniero

Lazarus trunk+FPC trunk x86, Windows x64 unless otherwise specified

BigChimp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5740
  • Add to the wiki - it's free ;)
    • FPCUp, PaperTiger scanning and other open source projects
Just uploaded a test version for Raspbian (cross compiled on Windows using the fpcup Linux ARM cross compiler edit which results in a real, honest-to-goodness bona fide Linux executable).

Doing something like this in advance may be a good idea:
Code: [Select]
aptitude install libgtk2.0-dev libgdk-pixbuf2.0-dev libpango1.0-dev subversion unzip

It at least runs on my raspbian emulator, but haven't tested further.

Please report if it works for you - thanks!
« Last Edit: January 14, 2014, 06:34:07 pm by BigChimp »
Want quicker answers to your questions? Read http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_Faq#What_is_the_correct_way_to_ask_questions_in_the_forum.3F

Open source including papertiger OCR/PDF scanning:
https://bitbucket.org/reiniero

Lazarus trunk+FPC trunk x86, Windows x64 unless otherwise specified

nomorelogic

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 127
hi, I'm testing fpcup on my raspberry with raspbian wheezy
subversion and other libs already installed with apt-get

installation fails, some ideas?

thanks in advantage

Quote
./fpcup_raspbian_experimental --installdir=/home/pi/dev/development/laz01 --fpcURL=fixes --lazURL=trunk
fpcup
An FPC/Lazarus downloader/updater/installer
Open source freeware (modified LGPL/BSD), see:
https://bitbucket.org/reiniero/fpcup

This program will download the FPC and Lazarus sources
from the source Subversion/SVN repositories,
compile, and install.
Result: you get a fresh, up-to-date Lazarus/FPC installation.

Version: based on commit 5429afce43cc+ (Mon Jan 13 20:03:27 2014 +0100)
Build date: 2014/01/14 10:32:17
Compiled for CPU: arm on linux

Options:
Bootstrap compiler dir: /home/pi/dev/development/laz01/fpcbootstrap
Lazarus shortcut name:  Lazarus_laz01
Shortcut fpcup name:    fpcup_laz01_update
FPC URL:                http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/branches/fixes_2_6
FPC options:           
FPC directory:          /home/pi/dev/development/laz01/fpc
Lazarus directory:      /home/pi/dev/development/laz01/lazarus
Lazarus primary config path:
(Lazarus settings path) /home/pi/dev/development/laz01/config_lazarus
Lazarus URL:            http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/lazarus/trunk
Lazarus options:       
Keep local changes:     no
Log file name:          /home/pi/fpcup.log

Effective parameters:   
--installdir=/home/pi/dev/development/laz01
--fpcURL=fixes
--lazURL=trunk
Persistent parameters (can be saved in shell script):
--installdir="/home/pi/dev/development/laz01" --fpcURL="fixes" --lazURL="trunk"
Continue (Y/n):
Info: 23-12-13 06:39:59: fpcup 5429afce43cc+ (Mon Jan 13 20:03:27 2014 +0100) started.
Info: /home/pi/dev/development/laz01/fpcbootstrap/x86_64-linux-ppcx64 is not a valid x86_64-linux-ppcx64 application. x86_64-linux-ppcx64 exists but shows no (Free Pascal Compiler) in its output.
Info: Going to download /tmp/TMP00000.tmp from URL: ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/dist/2.6.2/bootstrap/x86_64-linux-ppcx64.bz2
Info: Going to move /tmp/TMP00000.tmp.out to /home/pi/dev/development/laz01/fpcbootstrap/x86_64-linux-ppcx64
Info: FPC: running make distclean:
Info: Checking out/updating FPC sources...
Info: FPC was at: branch revision 26447 (repository revision 26466)
Info: No updates for FPC found.
Info: TFPCInstaller: building module FPC...
Info: Running make all for FPC:

Info: FPC: Running fpc make all failed with exit code 2
Details:
ERROR: Error running BuildModuleCustom for module FPC
Info: Error running fpcup. Technical details: error executing sequence fpc; line: 5, param: FPC
Info: Error running fpcup. Technical details: error executing sequence Default; line: 3, param: fpc
FPCUp failed.
Please check log for details. Possible troubleshooting steps:
- run again with --verbose and check for make, lazbuild errors etc.
- make sure there's a valid SVN executable in your path.
- make sure the GNU binutils (make etc), windres, subversion client are installed
  e.g. on Debian/Ubuntu: aptitude install build-essential mingw32-binutils subversion
  ln -s /usr/bin/i586-mingw32msvc-windres /usr/bin/windres
  see http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_Resources#Checking_you_have_windres
- if compiling Lazarus, make sure your lhelp is closed.
- try removing all intermediate files by running fpcup with the --clean option
  and/or manually deleting all *.ppu/*.a/*.o followed by svn up
- if that does not work: use the --uninstall option to remove all files
  including your FPC and Lazarus directories
- remove the bootstrap compiler. fpcup will download it if required.
Info: 23-12-13 06:40:35: fpcup finished.


BigChimp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5740
  • Add to the wiki - it's free ;)
    • FPCUp, PaperTiger scanning and other open source projects
Thanks for testing, nomorelogic!

Quote
Info: 23-12-13 06:39:59: fpcup 5429afce43cc+ (Mon Jan 13 20:03:27 2014 +0100) started.
Info: /home/pi/dev/development/laz01/fpcbootstrap/x86_64-linux-ppcx64 is not a valid x86_64-linux-ppcx64 application. x86_64-linux-ppcx64 exists but shows no (Free Pascal Compiler) in its output.
Info: Going to download /tmp/TMP00000.tmp from URL: ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/dist/2.6.2/bootstrap/x86_64-linux-ppcx64.bz2
Info: Going to move /tmp/TMP00000.tmp.out to /home/pi/dev/development/laz01/fpcbootstrap/x86_64-linux-ppcx64
This is troubling. Fpcup apparently thinks it's runing on an x64 machine and is trying to download the corresponding compiler.

I'll look into this problem, thanks!
« Last Edit: January 16, 2014, 03:11:11 pm by BigChimp »
Want quicker answers to your questions? Read http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_Faq#What_is_the_correct_way_to_ask_questions_in_the_forum.3F

Open source including papertiger OCR/PDF scanning:
https://bitbucket.org/reiniero

Lazarus trunk+FPC trunk x86, Windows x64 unless otherwise specified

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2018