Recent

Author Topic: Lazarus Release 2.0.0  (Read 77870 times)

Martin_fr

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5699
    • wiki
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #45 on: February 07, 2019, 12:26:46 am »
2. My only previous experience with releases was 1.8.4, there were 5 release candidates there. And there were statements to the effect, test now ...

Maybe we need to work on how/that we communicate release candidate schedules.

Also at the moment there is little extra organization how regressions are handled. That is everyone is committed to fix them of course. But there is no central checking point to ensure all known regression are fixed (as far as possible).

The RCs are announced. Bug reports and regression reports are mixed with other postings here on the forum. A few are posted on the mail list. Some are reported on mantis, but they are not marked there as regressions. So they occasionally get lost.

Need to see what can be done.

dbannon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
    • tomboy-ng, a rewrite of the classic Tomboy
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #46 on: February 07, 2019, 12:38:02 am »
Thanks Martin for your well considered words.

Should that particular bug be "re-logged" or reopened or what to ensure it is deal with in later releases ?

Davo
Lazarus 2, Linux (and reluctantly Win10, OSX)
My Project - https://github.com/tomboy-notes/tomboy-ng

VTwin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 787
  • Former Turbo Pascal 3 user
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #47 on: February 07, 2019, 01:03:23 am »
Excellent news! Many thanks to the team.

I will begin installing it on my machines.
“Talk is cheap. Show me the code.” -Linus Torvalds

macOS 10.13.6: Lazarus 2.0 (2.0.7) fixes svn 62148 (64 bit Cocoa)
Ubuntu 18.04.3: Lazarus 2.0.6 (64 bit on VBox)
Windows 7 Pro SP1: Lazarus 2.0.6 (64 bit on VBox)
fpc 3.0.4

Martin_fr

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5699
    • wiki
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #48 on: February 07, 2019, 01:23:07 am »
Should that particular bug be "re-logged" or reopened or what to ensure it is deal with in later releases ?
I am getting feedback, if it was an oversight, or if there were other reasons. (I can't comment on the issue myself, not my area)

For reference, if an issue will be (or has been) merged can be seen here: http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_2.0_fixes_branch
(Extremely rarely someone may merge something without putting it on the list, then only svn logs will tell..., but realy that is extremely rare.)


dbannon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
    • tomboy-ng, a rewrite of the classic Tomboy
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #49 on: February 07, 2019, 02:16:19 am »
For reference, if an issue will be (or has been) merged can be seen here: http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_2.0_fixes_branch
Ah, very useful indeed. I'll book mark that and watch for the bug, if it does not show up, I'll yell out !

And I do think it would be useful to announcement formal release is imminent, something along the lines of "RC3 is looking like it folks." Just "process improvement", not a complaint. Given the fabulous job done by a bunch of volunteers, I'm not silly enough to complain !

Thanks.
Davo
Lazarus 2, Linux (and reluctantly Win10, OSX)
My Project - https://github.com/tomboy-notes/tomboy-ng

avk

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
    • my self-education project
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #50 on: February 07, 2019, 08:17:54 am »
Congratulations to the Lazarus team!

bobkos

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 26
    • Personal Finance Manager
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #51 on: February 07, 2019, 02:57:33 pm »
So first of all thank you to all contributors for next release!

May I ask a question just fro my understanding, I have some calcaulator form in my application and of course I'm handling "division by zero" cases by "try except" section, however after update to 2.0 I've found that instead of "exceptions" it's become assigning a "+Inf" as value. After some investigation I've found a thread on forum about explanation and tip how to deal it by excluding TFPUExceptionMask's option - exZeroDivide. My question is, if it really old behavior of FPC/Lazarus why that's was not happened before in Lazarus 1.8.2 on the same PC?

Thank you in advance.

MarkZ

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 3
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #52 on: February 07, 2019, 08:51:55 pm »
I did a side-by-side 32-bit install to 1.8.4 on Win10-64, so got the dialog for config file version conflict and to use the --pcp option for having 2 installs, which I did using the Windows-R Run dialog. After doing this Laz2 does not remember this was set on the previous run and to use the new config directory when it starts. I had to manually edit the startup shortcut to use the option on each invoke.

Also, it would be nice if the installer asked which top menu name/shortcut name prefix should be used when a previous installation is detected but not being upgraded and overwritten, so the shortcuts and menus from existing version aren't affected.

The installer really only supports shortcuts/menu for one install, since (afaik) all shortcuts have the same name. (Of course once you renamend them, it should be fine.

You should NOT need to edit the properties of the shortcut(s) to add pcp.

If you click on "secondary install" you will be ask for a config dir. This config dir is stored inside the lazarus dir, in a file called lazarus.cfg.

Secondary install applies to same version numbers, i.e. 2.0 release and 2.0 fixes; installer was complaining "base version not found" or some such when I tried that option. This "lazarus.cfg" file is not mentioned as what is checked for in addition to the default dir, or its format if someone wants create or edit it manually, that I've seen in the docs. The --pcp option doesn't create it either, apparently only the installer does. It also does not have a location entry in Options/Environment/Files dialog pane, so side-by-sides of the same version can share a config file if they want, for this .cfg or the config file itself directly.

Yes, the menu shortcuts can have the same name, if the menu directory they're part of is named differently. I think (haven't looked at them in detail recently) menu directory name is static strings in .ist files, not variables like install dir. Desktop shortcuts could be handled similarly, afaik.

Given for fresh installs these gotchas don't apply these comments are nits, not bug reports, but would enhance the OOBE for other users of the current version, I imagine, that like me want to test things in the new one for unknown regressions with their own code.

Martin_fr

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5699
    • wiki

JuhaManninen

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3646
  • I like bugs.
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #54 on: February 08, 2019, 07:53:52 am »
I feel a bit disingenuous to complain but it seems this bug https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=34795
did not get fixed before release ?  Its marked as 'resolved' and at r60064
I marked it now for merging to fixes branch and thus 2.0.2.
I guess I wanted more testing for it and then forgot it.

dbannon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
    • tomboy-ng, a rewrite of the classic Tomboy
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #55 on: February 08, 2019, 01:16:01 pm »
I marked it now for merging to fixes branch and thus 2.0.2.
Thanks Juha, I'll watch for it to appear this time!

Davo
Lazarus 2, Linux (and reluctantly Win10, OSX)
My Project - https://github.com/tomboy-notes/tomboy-ng

piola

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #56 on: February 08, 2019, 01:35:02 pm »
It was marked as resolved and applied  in the bug tracker, I thought that enough to be sure it was 'happening'.

Obviously the same thing happened to a bug that I reported. It's even mentioned that it's fixed ("r59951 IDE"), but it ain't.

This is a very annoying issue because you have to confirm the warning on each and every compile. Hope it's scheduled for 2.2 now.

JuhaManninen

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3646
  • I like bugs.
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #57 on: February 08, 2019, 02:51:03 pm »
Obviously the same thing happened to a bug that I reported. It's even mentioned that it's fixed ("r59951 IDE"), but it ain't.
Did you check from the commit log and it is not merged? Does it work for you in trunk?

Quote
This is a very annoying issue because you have to confirm the warning on each and every compile. Hope it's scheduled for 2.2 now.
If it really is missing, it will be merged for 2.0.2.

Martin_fr

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5699
    • wiki
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #58 on: February 08, 2019, 04:11:46 pm »
It was marked as resolved and applied  in the bug tracker, I thought that enough to be sure it was 'happening'.

Obviously the same thing happened to a bug that I reported. It's even mentioned that it's fixed ("r59951 IDE"), but it ain't.
I just tested with fixes 2.0 (which is the same as release + 2 lldb fixes, so for this issue: the same)
- New project (empty form), saved D:\project.lpi/lpr D:\unit1.pas, compiled, run.

I can not reproduce it (and I did get the issue in Dec 2018).

I also found the entry on the merge wiki, search for r59952 => that is the revision resulting from the merge.
Since it is fixed (or at least a fix committed) to trunk and fixes branch, there are 2 commits. r59951 and r59952

It is unfortunate that the one mentioned in mantis and the wiki differ...., but that is a 2ndary problem. (and searching for the issue number 34545 will find it)
If you indeed still get it on release 2.0.0 then we need new steps to reproduce.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2019, 04:14:58 pm by Martin_fr »

piola

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Re: Lazarus Release 2.0.0
« Reply #59 on: February 08, 2019, 04:20:35 pm »
- New project (empty form), saved D:\project.lpi/lpr D:\unit1.pas, compiled, run.

I can not reproduce it (and I did get the issue in Dec 2018).

Quite funny  :) when I do the same, it works fine for me too.

Try this:

- New project, empty form
- Save both to d:\temp
- In project options, set target filename to D:\project1.exe
- Compile -> Warning about missing output directory (at least for me  ;))