Recent

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
General / Re: Sizes and SizeInt
« Last post by LemonParty on Today at 02:06:45 pm »
Mixing singned and unsigned variables is bad.

Uderstood.
12
Third party / Re: IndySecOpenSSL is now available on OPM
« Last post by LeP on Today at 01:44:08 pm »
Quote from: tonyw on Today at 12:54:02 pm
It's not simply enough to use a LTS but you must also keep up-to-date with the most recent version of the OpenSSL library. When you check the release notes you will often find that each version fixes a number of security vulnerabilities.
If you are going to go back to 3.5 then you should use 3.5.7 - released yesterday.

Of course, I always stay up-to-date with 3.5, 3.6 and 4. All old versions were dropped. Now I'll tested all new version with Taurus and after I'll try with IndySec.
13
Third party / Re: IndySecOpenSSL is now available on OPM
« Last post by tonyw on Today at 01:03:50 pm »
Quote from: TheMouseAUS on Today at 12:01:20 pm
Hi Everyone, thanks for your input,

The Indy TCP Server with TLS is running on a Debian 13 box which when queried says the OpenSSL version is 3.5.6.

I will log the status call backs and see what light they may shed.

One thing I have just tested is my dev box has openssl v 3.6.2 and I havent seen that issue maybe it is a OpenSSL bug? In which case I am going to either have to upgrade Debians version or ignore the error?
It could easily be an issue for OpenSSL given the error message has been reported elsewhere and IndySecOpenSSL relies on OpenSSL to establish communication and should not send any application data before ssl_connect has completed.

It will be interesting to see if the issue exists in the new OpenSSL 3.5.7.

The fun bit is always going to be keeping up-to-date with OpenSSL releases when you are tied into Debian versions. Hopefully, LTS versions of Debian rely on LTS versions of OpenSSL and issue updates to ensure they are up-to-date with their version of OpenSSL. If you are using an old stable version of Debian then you may need to upgrade to the latest stable version of Debian in order to ensure that your security patches are up-to-date. As always, it is a good idea to read release notes.
14
Third party / Re: IndySecOpenSSL is now available on OPM
« Last post by tonyw on Today at 12:54:02 pm »
Quote from: LeP on Today at 11:39:37 am
Quote from: tonyw on Today at 11:15:12 am
Currently, your only reason to switch to the 3.5 branch of IndySecOpenSSL is that you want to enforce the use of OpenSSL 3.5 or later.

Let's say that using 3.5 is practically mandatory given the "expiration" of the older versions in just over three months.
If you're providing a commercial product, obviously the application vision is long-term, so using a "long-term" LTS is essential.

I use TaurusTLS, but I also keep the sources updated with IndySecOpenSSL releases. It's been a while since I tested IndySecOpenSSL, however.

I was currently using OpenSSL version 4, but with this in mind, I rightly think I'll go back to 3.5.
It's not simply enough to use a LTS but you must also keep up-to-date with the most recent version of the OpenSSL library. When you check the release notes you will often find that each version fixes a number of security vulnerabilities.

Both IndySecOpenSSL and TaurusTLS share a common code base and are forks of my initial attempt to add OpenSSL 3 support to IndySockets. My intent is for IndySecOpenSSL to be a stable package adding https support for Indy, but limiting it to that. TaurusTLS seems to be aiming to additionally provide new functionality with, for example, OpenSSL 4. The PascalAPI4OpenSSL is available for the TaurusTLS team to help exploit the new functionality.

If you are going to go back to 3.5 then you should use 3.5.7 - released yesterday.
15
General / Re: how to add a ForEach call to TFPGList
« Last post by jamie on Today at 12:42:04 pm »
There is already a enumerator in that generics, just encase it with a inline function.
Jamie
16
Other / Re: XLibre, finally and fortunately.
« Last post by kagamma on Today at 12:15:10 pm »
Quote from: Thaddy on Today at 08:49:03 am
(I assume that any developer has at least two monitors for serious programming. If you can't because of financial issues I am happy to donate two monitors (new, I have to order them), just send a private message and we work that out only considering shipping, same as with the Raspberry Pi's, usually that is also free as some of you know. Note I am affluent but not rich: 2 monitors for two different people)
I have 3 monitors: 2 144Hz monitors for gaming and 1 wacom cintiq 16 for drawing. I also have a VR headset, which itself counts as a monitor as well :)
This is also one of the reasons I prefer X: I like my software to remember the positions of their windows across my monitors, which wayland still couldn't do the last time I checked.
17
Options / [SOLVED] Watches panel is floating
« Last post by CM630 on Today at 12:06:33 pm »
My Watches panel is floating, I do not know how and why it started doing so.
How to fix it in its usual place in the bottom, next to Messages, Search Results, etc.?
I tried to disable and then enable docking from Main menu — Tools — Options — Environment —Docking / Anchordocking, but did not help.

EDIT: I did it. I Enabled “Show headers”, then I started dragging the header of Watches... somehow I put it in the right place.
18
Third party / Re: IndySecOpenSSL is now available on OPM
« Last post by TheMouseAUS on Today at 12:01:20 pm »
Hi Everyone, thanks for your input,

The Indy TCP Server with TLS is running on a Debian 13 box which when queried says the OpenSSL version is 3.5.6.

I will log the status call backs and see what light they may shed.

One thing I have just tested is my dev box has openssl v 3.6.2 and I havent seen that issue maybe it is a OpenSSL bug? In which case I am going to either have to upgrade Debians version or ignore the error?
19
Debugger / Re: How to monitor changes in a control's property value during debugging
« Last post by Martin_fr on Today at 11:55:18 am »
In short: FPC (the compiler) does not yet support this. https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,73965.0.html

If it is going to be implemented, then availability may depend on your platform.

That is in order to get the value of that property the debugger must call
Code: Pascal  [Select][+][-]
  1. Edit1.GetEnbled();
Function call are currently only supported by the FpDebug debugger. And only on i386 or x86 architectures under Windows and Linux. Other platforms don't support that.

Also the above patch for the compiler will currently only be understood by FpDebug (albeit, when DWARF-6 is released, any other debugger could adapt it... But I don't know if they will)


As for you specific issue.

If you are using FpDebug and your platform is Windows/Linux i386 or x86.
- Go to: Tools > Options > Debugger > General. And enable the checkbox "allow function calls in watches"
- Add a Watch: Edit1.GetEnabled()
  The "()" are mandatory
- In the watch properties enable "Allow function calls"

And then you will see the value.

Mind you, if that call has side effects, those side effects will be in your app, just as if the app itself had called the function.
I don't expect "GetEnabled" to have any side effects, but if it had.. If you do that for other functions... E.g. some functions may create a handle. And that can affect what the app does later.

In case of TEdit the call to GetEnabled should just return "Edit1.FEnabled".
So you may instead watch that field.

If you watch the field, you can also create a "watchpoint" => then you can run the app with F9, and the debugger will pause it when the field is written to.


And one more note.

Due to another shortcoming of FPC, some functions are not available in the final exe. Either the code is not even compiled in, or the compiler did not create the info for the debugger where the code is. In those cases the debugger can not call it.

Afaik, GetEnabled should always be included. Others may not. If a function is not included, check if your code uses it. (ideally have it called within the unit that wants to debug it / the actual rule is more complicated...)

Hope this helps.
20
Third party / Re: Conscious Artificial Intelligence - Project Update
« Last post by Dzandaa on Today at 11:50:59 am »
Hi Joao-Paulo,

Can me explain me how to create a semantic segmentation of an image?

Is it possible with CAI?

Thank you.

B->
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10

TinyPortal © 2005-2018