Lazarus

Announcements => Lazarus => Topic started by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 10:43:37 am

Title: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 10:43:37 am
The Lazarus team has scheduled

      Lazarus 2.0.8
      for April 2020 (estimated 14th to 20th)

      This release will be built with FPC 3.0.4.

Here is the list of fixes for Lazarus 2.0.8 (since 2.0.0):
http://wiki.freepascal.org/Lazarus_2.0_fixes_branch


We would invite everyone to provide their feedback to help us improve
this upcoming release. Please let as know in particular:
- Any bug-fixes already made to trunk, that you believe should still be
  merged to the fixes branch (fixes that are not listed on the above wiki page)
- Any regressions that happened in fixes branch since the release of 2.0
- Other urgent matters, you believe we should know before the release.

Please attempt to provide your feedback by: 9th April 2020


More info on our release process can be found at (work in progress):
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_release_engineering

Information about the previous release:
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_2.0.0_release_notes
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/User_Changes_3.0.4


The intended minimum requirements for the release will be:

Windows:
   2k(*), XP(*), Vista, 7, 8, 8.1 and 10, 32 or 64bit.

FreeBSD/Linux:
   gtk 2.8 for gtk2, qt4.5 for qt, qt5.6 for qt5, 32 or 64bit.

macOS:
   10.5 to 10.12; Carbon (32bit), Cocoa (64bit, beta), qt and qt5
   (32 or 64bit).


(*) requires install from sources

Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: eljo on April 02, 2020, 11:02:22 am
just a quick question is the help still broken?
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 11:37:22 am
just a quick question is the help still broken?
Is/Was there a bug report about it?
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: eljo on April 02, 2020, 11:38:25 am
just a quick question is the help still broken?
Is/Was there a bug report about it?
I have no idea. I'm not that a frequent user.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 11:39:12 am
Deleted off topic comments
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 11:40:34 am
just a quick question is the help still broken?
Is/Was there a bug report about it?
I have no idea. I'm not that a frequent user.
Well, I was not aware that it is/was broken. Nor in which way it is/was broken.
Neither do I know if any other Developer knows.

So where/how does it go wrong? On what OS?
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: eljo on April 02, 2020, 12:15:59 pm
really its so obvious its painful non the less here are the steps to recreate the problem

Start a new project
On the form that was auto created for you add a method name it test or something
add a variable on the body of the test procedure of type TSQLQuery;
so the code should now look like this
Code: Pascal  [Select][+][-]
  1. procedure TForm1.Test;
  2. var
  3.  
  4.   Qry :TSQLQuery;
  5.  
  6. begin
  7.   qry := TSQLQuery.create() ;
  8.   try
  9.  
  10.   finally
  11.     Qry.Free;
  12.   end;
  13. end;
  14.  
place the cursor  somewhere on the TSQLQuery word and press F1.
In my installation I get a message  (copy-paste from my current test)
Quote
[Window Title]
No help found for this topic

[Content]
No help found for "unit1.pas" at (34,14)

[Cancel]

version info as copied from the about box.
  Lazarus 2.0.4 r61665 FPC 3.0.4 i386-win32-win32/win64

that's it, the search does not work it comes up empty.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: wp on April 02, 2020, 12:28:43 pm
I confirm this behaviour with Laz trunk. But once the corresponding unit (sqldb) is listed in "uses", it works as expected. Same with ancient Laz 1.6.4. My feeling is that help never worked as you are expecting (although it would be reasonable).
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: eljo on April 02, 2020, 12:33:48 pm
I confirm this behaviour with Laz trunk. But once the corresponding unit (sqldb) is listed in "uses", it works as expected. Same with ancient Laz 1.6.4. My feeling is that help never worked as you are expecting (although it would be reasonable).

No it worked at some point, I remember using it to find out which unit to add to the uses clause on my units. if you say that 1.6.8 has the same behavior then I guess I remember it from 1.4 or older. Can I be wrong though and remember some other IDE? I'm certain it was pascal. Oh well, at least now you are aware.

Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 12:38:26 pm
Does your project compile? Do you have "sqldb" in the uses clause?

I did some tests:
- If I add your code, but do not add "uses sqldb", then I do get the error.
- If I add "uses sqldb" then it works.

Unfortunately I am not the one who maintains the help system, and I do not know how it is designed.

There could be many TSqlQuery in different units.
So if the IDE can not detect (from the uses clause, and from parsing the code in your unit), where TSqlQuery is defined, then I have no idea what it is designed to do.

Ideally it should give a list of all help topics for the highlighted word.
I do not know if that is implemented.

IMHO, it should be reported in our bug tracker.


If you need to find what unit to add to your uses: https://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_IDE_Tools#Unit_.2F_Identifier_Dictionary_.28Cody.29
(though there was some trick needed, to scan and create the dictionary)

If you have queries on this, best to open a new forum thread, with a matching subject, so people who know will see it.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 12:39:26 pm
No it worked at some point, I remember using it to find out which unit to add to the uses clause on my units. if you say that 1.6.8 has the same behavior then I guess I remember it from 1.4 or older. Can I be wrong though and remember some other IDE? I'm certain it was pascal. Oh well, at least now you are aware.
Only if someone adds it to the bug tracker.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: wp on April 02, 2020, 12:52:05 pm
I remember using it to find out which unit to add to the uses clause on my units.
Just OT: If you want to add a component at runtime and do not know which unit to add, simply add that component to the form at designtime and then delete the component again. The IDE adds the unit to the uses list and keeps it there even if the component does not exist any more..
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: dbannon on April 02, 2020, 12:52:26 pm
No it worked at some point, I remember using it to find out which unit to add to the uses clause on my units. if you say that 1.6.8 has the same behavior then I guess I remember it from 1.4 or older. Can I be wrong though and remember some other IDE? I'm certain it was pascal. Oh well, at least now you are aware.

Eljo, I wonder if you are thing of the "Show Unit, Identifier Dictionary" ?  Its great when you want to know what unit needs to be included.  However, it maintains its own database and needs to learn where things that you use are.  But I sure recommend it.

Hmm, maybe you need to install 'cody' package, then you will find it under the 'Source' menu.

Davo
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: ASerge on April 02, 2020, 12:53:54 pm
- Any bug-fixes already made to trunk, that you believe should still be
  merged to the fixes branch (fixes that are not listed on the above wiki page)
Already resolved from the bug list:
34759 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=34759),
35465 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35465),
35466 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35466),
35696 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35696),
35173 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35173),
35512 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35512),
35694 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35694),
35467 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35467).
It is strange that many patches wait for years and are not applied. Why make them at all?
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: marcov on April 02, 2020, 01:16:33 pm
I tested a bit, and it seems nowadays LHelp only opens the relevant CHM instead of all CHMs in the tree.

The old trick of just entering lhelp and searching thus doesn't work anymore (since it is now localized to the opened CHM. Before this was a tree of CHMs and this used to work).

Moreover very weird, if you close lhelp, you see the other help files flashing, so they are still loaded but in hidden other windows? But this hack kills the overall index.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 01:33:33 pm
It is strange that many patches wait for years and are not applied. Why make them at all?
It's a known problem, with many reasons...

Some are simply overlooked.
If no one acknowledged the mantis-report  (in 4 to 8 weeks), then add a ping, or better send a mail to the maillist, asking for the patch to be reviewed.

Some are not picked up, because there is no dedicated maintainer to the code, and everyone is too busy. Or the patch is touching a complex problem, that needs deep investigation and testing. (The "pass the buck" situation / not good, but happens). Same way to go, ask on the mail list.

Once it is assigned, there should hopefully at least be a comment or other communication....
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: lucamar on April 02, 2020, 02:39:11 pm
The intended minimum requirements for the release will be:

Windows:
   2k(*), XP(*), [...]

(*) requires install from sources

Does that means there will be no installer for those two OSs? And, if so, will this be just for this release or from now on?
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: JuhaManninen on April 02, 2020, 02:54:01 pm
Already resolved from the bug list:
34759 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=34759),
It was a controversial issue and the patch was just applied. I don't feel comfortable merging it. Usually something bad happens with such last moment merges. Also the bug was not serious, no crashes or lost data or such.
Quote
35465 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35465),
Removing two unused parameters it not a bug fix by any criteria. It can be seen as a useless change because those parameters could be used in some future prospect. I remember getting feedback for applying such a patch.
Anyway, not merging for sure!
Quote
35466 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35466),
C'mon! Deleting one unused variable is not a bug fix.
Quote
35696 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35696),
This was applied from Mattias. I marked it for merging anyway now. Thanks.
Quote
35173 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35173),
Marked for merging now. Thanks.
Quote
35512 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35512),
Marked for merging. Thanks.
Quote
35694 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35694),
Minor tweaking, or a micropatch as you call it. Not a bug fix, not merged.
Quote
35467 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35467).
Another "micropatch" eliminating one variable. Why should it be merged to a bug fix release?

ASerge, I think you have misunderstood the idea of a fixes branch and a bug fix release.
Only bug fixes are merged. No new features, no refactoring, no optimization, no minor tweaking, no controversial patches which will need testing in trunk and possible further changes.

Quote
It is strange that many patches wait for years and are not applied. Why make them at all?
Yes but that is a whole different problem. Patches, when applied, are always applied to trunk. Some patches are ignored for a long time which is bad, but it is not related to the process of merging to fixes branch.
Two different things.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: wp on April 02, 2020, 02:56:55 pm
Already resolved from the bug list:
34759 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=34759),
35465 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35465),
35466 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35466),
35696 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35696),
35173 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35173),
35512 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35512),
35694 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35694),
35467 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35467).
It is strange that many patches wait for years and are not applied. Why make them at all?
I looked through this list and found:
34759 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=34759) - fixed on May 31, 2020.
35465 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35465), 35466 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35466),  35696 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35696), 35173 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35173), 35512 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35512), 35694 (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35694), https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=35467 - you commented resolved reports. Don't do this, nobody will notice that you added something. Always reopen the report and put it to "feedback" (Not sure if a reporter is allowed to put a report to "feedback". But anyway, even if you can't do this, an unresolved report is much more visible than a resolved one).

Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 03:13:34 pm
Does that means there will be no installer for those two OSs? And, if so, will this be just for this release or from now on?

I am not sure about other recent releases. 

I recently lost an ssd. While I have all my data, all applications/OS had to be re-installed.
The problem is what Windows versions innosetup runs on. The most recent version only targets Vista and up.

I can roll back to the 5.6 version used before, but:
 - not tested, supposedly it supports XP
 - though not sure if that includes the unicode version which was used

Eventually the upgrade will probably be needed, as there may be new features that could be useful.

So if the 2.0.6 installer indeed works on xp/2k (someone needs to test that), and there is demand for such an installer, then we can go for this (and maybe a  few more releases) with the older inno setup.

That said, those older Windows versions are not actively tested. They work, if any bugs are reported in time to be fixed for a release.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 03:17:42 pm
Without having gone through the list of bug reports myself (I left a note for the assigned developers), just to note: Usually only fixes (i.e. fix of a bug) will be merged. Features and optimizations will normally not be merged (there may be exceptions, but those are extremely limited)
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: sstvmaster on April 02, 2020, 03:53:58 pm
      Lazarus 2.0.8
      for April 2020 (estimated 14th to 20th)

      This release will be built with FPC 3.0.4.

Does it mean 2.0.8 comes with fpc 3.0.4 or fpc 3.2?
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: JuhaManninen on April 02, 2020, 04:10:00 pm
Does it mean 2.0.8 comes with fpc 3.0.4 or fpc 3.2?
It was written there quite clearly.
BTW, FPC 3.2 does not exist yet.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 04:59:30 pm
Does it mean 2.0.8 comes with fpc 3.0.4 or fpc 3.2?
3.0.4

If you want to test with the 3.2RC1 => there are snapshot builds (2.0.7 + 3.2RC1) for Windows: https://sourceforge.net/projects/lazarus-snapshots/
2.0.7 has most of the fixes that will be in 2.0.8.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: JuhaManninen on April 02, 2020, 04:59:58 pm
- you commented resolved reports. Don't do this, nobody will notice that you added something. Always reopen the report and put it to "feedback"
I noticed when I went through the issues. :)
Reopening is not needed in this case. Questions about merging etc. is better done in mailing list or here in forum.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: lucamar on April 02, 2020, 05:11:54 pm
So if the 2.0.6 installer indeed works on xp/2k (someone needs to test that), and there is demand for such an installer, then we can go for this (and maybe a  few more releases) with the older inno setup.

I can confirm that the 2.0.6 installer works in at least: W2K+sp4, XP+sp2 and XP+sp3. I know that those are by now considered "ancient" but there're quite some people out there still using them (on the principle "if it ain't break don't touch it" :))

Of course, if there's no other option and we need to do it we'll install from source but having an installer would be a big bonus. Remember that these are rather old machines: building Lazarus on them is quite a lenghty process, more so if one also needs to build FPC (which thankfully isn't the case .. yet?)
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 05:39:36 pm
Well as long as the Lazarus installer runs, it installs fpc too.

That is of course, fpc must itself be able to run on the machine. As I said, none of this was about the content that gets installed, but only about inno setup running on that machine.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: lucamar on April 02, 2020, 06:55:04 pm
Well as long as the Lazarus installer runs, it installs fpc too.

Yes; I was thinking more of the future Lazarus 2.2 with FPC 3.2. If there is no installer one would have to install a previous version (say, 2.0.6), build fpc 3.2 and then build lazarus 2.2, which can easily mean a lost morning on an old machine (say a P4 2.4 Mhz w/512 MiB). Yes, I know there are methods to alleviate this (say, copying over an installation from a Win7 machine) but it's still difficult (and slow, though much less) for fully isolated machines.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 07:05:58 pm
I've set my scripts back to the older inno setup. I'll see how the build goes, when I build 2.0.8.

I have no immediate plans to change things for 2.2.  So probably going to be ok too.

The Snapshots from 2 or 3 days ago, use the new inno. Further snapshots will be older inno as well. (So there will eventually be builds with the fpc rc that can go onto xp/2k)
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: ASerge on April 02, 2020, 07:07:56 pm
When ready-made patches that are confirmed are not applied for years, it kills the idea of team support for the product, because the work of team members is ignored, citing either lack of time or unimportant completion :'(.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: lucamar on April 02, 2020, 07:12:58 pm
Further snapshots will be older inno as well. (So there will eventually be builds with the fpc rc that can go onto xp/2k)

Thanks, Martin.

I know it's not a big deal, this building from source, but having a ready-made installer really helps.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: JuhaManninen on April 02, 2020, 07:37:33 pm
Yes; I was thinking more of the future Lazarus 2.2 with FPC 3.2. If there is no installer one would have to install a previous version (say, 2.0.6), build fpc 3.2 and then build lazarus 2.2, ...
No. You make it sound more dramatic than it is. FPC will most likely have an installer of some sort for old Windows. Once FPC is there, building Lazarus from sources is easy. Building FPC would indeed be a bigger task.
You must build Lazarus in any case occasionally when installing packages. No big deal.
I am not saying that dropping Lazarus installer for old Windows is a good thing. I only say it is not such a serious matter.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 02, 2020, 07:50:12 pm
One important thing about building Lazarus on low end systems. Especially low memory systems (such as any 32bit, with a max of 4G mem):

Disable smart linking. Smart linking the IDE, can take serious time, if you lack memory.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: JuhaManninen on April 02, 2020, 08:14:27 pm
When ready-made patches that are confirmed are not applied for years, it kills the idea of team support for the product, because the work of team members is ignored, citing either lack of time or unimportant completion :'(.
I remember most of your patches have been applied within a reasonable time frame. Yes, there may be exceptions for that.
I have applied a big number of your patches.
Please start a new forum thread about ignored patches and list the problematic ones. They are not really related to Lazarus 2.0.8 release and merging process.

I agree with you that ignoring a contributor's patch for a long time is a bad thing and should not happen.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: ca70du on April 02, 2020, 09:54:10 pm
The Lazarus team has scheduled

      Lazarus 2.0.8
      for April 2020 (estimated 14th to 20th)

      This release will be built with FPC 3.0.4.

Here is the list of fixes for Lazarus 2.0.8 (since 2.0.0):
http://wiki.freepascal.org/Lazarus_2.0_fixes_branch


We would invite everyone to provide their feedback to help us improve
this upcoming release. Please let as know in particular:
- Any bug-fixes already made to trunk, that you believe should still be
  merged to the fixes branch (fixes that are not listed on the above wiki page)
- Any regressions that happened in fixes branch since the release of 2.0
- Other urgent matters, you believe we should know before the release.

Please attempt to provide your feedback by: 9th April 2020


More info on our release process can be found at (work in progress):
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_release_engineering

Information about the previous release:
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_2.0.0_release_notes
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/User_Changes_3.0.4


The intended minimum requirements for the release will be:

Windows:
   2k(*), XP(*), Vista, 7, 8, 8.1 and 10, 32 or 64bit.

FreeBSD/Linux:
   gtk 2.8 for gtk2, qt4.5 for qt, qt5.6 for qt5, 32 or 64bit.

macOS:
   10.5 to 10.12; Carbon (32bit), Cocoa (64bit, beta), qt and qt5
   (32 or 64bit).


(*) requires install from sources

Please, fix the annoying 0036261: Build the IDE fails issue.

[]'s,
Carlos Eduardo S. Matuzaki
Curitiba/PR/Brazil
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: wp on April 02, 2020, 11:31:01 pm
Has been fixed and back-ported several months ago (r62208: IDE+lazbuild: build IDE: pass idemake.cfg without quotes, issue 36261) --> it will be included.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: eljo on April 03, 2020, 02:55:08 am
Does your project compile? Do you have "sqldb" in the uses clause?
aparently not that was the point to find out where the class where defined.
I did some tests:
- If I add your code, but do not add "uses sqldb", then I do get the error.
- If I add "uses sqldb" then it works.
well the search for information is more than half the help functionality but I get your point.

Unfortunately I am not the one who maintains the help system, and I do not know how it is designed.

There could be many TSqlQuery in different units.
So if the IDE can not detect (from the uses clause, and from parsing the code in your unit), where TSqlQuery is defined, then I have no idea what it is designed to do.

Ideally it should give a list of all help topics for the highlighted word.
I do not know if that is implemented.

IMHO, it should be reported in our bug tracker.


If you need to find what unit to add to your uses: https://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Lazarus_IDE_Tools#Unit_.2F_Identifier_Dictionary_.28Cody.29
(though there was some trick needed, to scan and create the dictionary)

If you have queries on this, best to open a new forum thread, with a matching subject, so people who know will see it.
Agreed with most of your points so far. Being a tourist in this community I fill like complaining for a free meal so I mostly keep it to my self except maybe a hint here and there.


Eljo, I wonder if you are thing of the "Show Unit, Identifier Dictionary" ?  Its great when you want to know what unit needs to be included.  However, it maintains its own database and needs to learn where things that you use are.  But I sure recommend it.

Hmm, maybe you need to install 'cody' package, then you will find it under the 'Source' menu.

Davo
I wasn't aware of that I'll have to take a closer look thank you, although old habits die hard and all that.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: dbannon on April 03, 2020, 06:06:08 am
I should point out that the problem with Ubuntu 20.04 beta mentioned https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,48720.msg351354.html#msg351354 but is much better documented at https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,48681.msg355565.html#msg355565 still exists.

I have just tested both Lazarus Fixes and Lazarus Trunk on a U20.04 beta, dated 1 April, and can confirm apps based on GTK2 made with Lazarus and Lazarus itself have a little crash at exit.  My tests from a month ago indicate that if I install the Ubuntu Repo FPC304 it does not happen !

Ubuntu is one of the more widely used Linux distros and 20.04 is a Long Term Release, good for six years.  While their beta is still three weeks away from release version, their time line indicates, to me, that what we see there now will be what we end up with !

As this problem can attributed to either Lazarus or FPC, its Lazarus because FPC does not use GTK, its FPC because, somehow, the Ubuntu developers have a FPC fix for it, no, tests I just conducted now indicate both problems still happen with Ubuntu repo release of FPC. Maybe its a packaging issue ?   No, its not.


Davo


Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 03, 2020, 02:00:35 pm
well the search for information is more than half the help functionality but I get your point.

Note, I do not say that it's not broken. Just I do not know, if the behaviour is correct or not (it could be either).

I'll ask around, maybe someone knows....

In the meantime, you can always add a bug report. If not a bug, then it is a feature....
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: mischi on April 03, 2020, 03:01:04 pm
With fpc 3.2.0-rc1, building lazarus-cocoa with 2.0-fixes is broken:

cocoaprivate.pas(1552,26) Error: identifier idents no member "setNeedsDisplay"
cocoaprivate.pas(1563,8) Error: identifier idents no member "setNeedsDisplay"

I do not really know the details, but I assume the update of the Cocoaint header translations has not been taken into account.

After replacing  setNeedsDisplay  in cocoaprivate.pas with  setNeedsDisplay_(true)  the next error shows up:

cocoascrollers.pas(53,15) Error: There is no method in an ancestor class to be overridden: "setDocumentView(NSView);"
cocoascrollers.pas(53,15) Error: Objective-C messages require their Objective-C selector name to be specified using the "message" directive.
cocoascrollers.pas(53,15) Error: Mismatch between number of declared parameters and number of colons in message string.

Filing a bug report.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: ASerge on April 03, 2020, 03:37:31 pm
I have applied a big number of your patches.
Sorry for the emotion. Thank you for what you are doing.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: ottod on April 03, 2020, 07:56:04 pm
When Lazarus 2.0.6 was released I tried to create Debian packages for Raspbian and I succeeded thanks to the work of the FPC and Lazarus teams. It is documented here:
https://wiki.freepascal.org/Build_current_FPC_and_Lazarus_for_Raspbian (https://wiki.freepascal.org/Build_current_FPC_and_Lazarus_for_Raspbian)
Those are instructions for the end-user trying to do the same.
For the team building the 2.0.8 release it is just adding support for the armhf architecture, which is done by editing two files, adding a couple of lines to each one: create_fpc_deb.sh and create_lazarus_deb.sh; steps 15 & 22 in the above wiki article.
I think many of us will be grateful to have official support for Raspbian. I am of the opinion that a tool like FPC/Lazarus is essential to put the Raspberry Pi 4 to business use in the under-developed parts of the world. VM and interpreted languages suffer a big performance hit that is easily overcome by the native compilation offered by FPC/Lazarus. Of course the same native compilation can be expected from C, Rust, and similar but they are lower level languages where you have to manually link to GTK, Qt or whatever to have a working desktop app.
If I can be of any help I'll be around.
Stay safe.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: young_nandy on April 04, 2020, 04:25:10 am
your website is still not updated. it's confusing, I guess it's not continued
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: trev on April 04, 2020, 07:31:26 am
your website is still not updated. it's confusing, I guess it's not continued

Looks updated to me - see attachment snipped from the Lazarus-IDE website home page.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 04, 2020, 12:57:17 pm
your website is still not updated. it's confusing, I guess it's not continued
What part of it is not updated?
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: mischi on April 06, 2020, 04:12:39 pm
With fpc 3.2.0-rc1, building lazarus-cocoa with 2.0-fixes is broken:

cocoaprivate.pas(1552,26) Error: identifier idents no member "setNeedsDisplay"
cocoaprivate.pas(1563,8) Error: identifier idents no member "setNeedsDisplay"

I do not really know the details, but I assume the update of the Cocoaint header translations has not been taken into account.

After replacing  setNeedsDisplay  in cocoaprivate.pas with  setNeedsDisplay_(true)  the next error shows up:

cocoascrollers.pas(53,15) Error: There is no method in an ancestor class to be overridden: "setDocumentView(NSView);"
cocoascrollers.pas(53,15) Error: Objective-C messages require their Objective-C selector name to be specified using the "message" directive.
cocoascrollers.pas(53,15) Error: Mismatch between number of declared parameters and number of colons in message string.

Filing a bug report.
Resolved for trunk with commit 62885 and merged to fixes_2_0 with commit 62901. You guys are doing a great job.
Title: Re: We are planning the next release: Lazarus 2.0.8
Post by: Martin_fr on April 10, 2020, 02:30:17 pm
See https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,49267.msg356643.html#msg356643
TinyPortal © 2005-2018