why are Linux distributions so far behind on Lazarus?

[wmeyer]

Hello,

 Wondering why the whole Ubuntu branch, at least, seems only to offer Lazarus 2.0.6. And secondarily, is there a clear set of instructions for the installation of the latest Lazarus release into Ubuntu or any of its variants, such as Linux Mint or Zorin?

[Handoko]

Using Ubuntu default repository means you usually don't get the latest version of the software. They done it for stability reason, that is what I heard. You can search for the Internet for more information.

No need special instruction for Installing Lazarus on Ubuntu. Just go to the link to download Lazarus, download all the 3 deb packages and install.

If you need more instruction, you can read it on the wiki page, and there are already many discussions for the topic in the forum.

[dbannon]

Ubuntu 22.04 has Lazarus 2.2.0

https://packages.ubuntu.com/jammy/devel/lazarus

The Ubuntu policy is only update security related things in long term release. So, if you are using Ubuntu 20.04 expect to get the Lazarus that was available in 2020.

Debian Testing tracks the current release of Lazarus, its possible, if you know what you are doing, to install it on an Ubuntu based release but far, far safer to install Lazarus from source.

See https://wiki.freepascal.org/Installing_Lazarus_on_Linux#Build_Lazarus_from_Source

 

[wmeyer]

Thank you. Pulled with git, and that went well, with these steps:
git clone https://gitlab.com/freepascal.org/lazarus/lazarus.git lazarus-main
cd lazarus-main

Then,
make clean
make bigide

make bigide failed, and though it is easy to see where, it is not especially helpful at this point:
Free Pascal Compiler version 3.0.4+dfsg-23 [2019/11/25] for x86_64
Copyright (c) 1993-2017 by Florian Klaempfl and others
(1002) Target OS: Linux for x86-64
(3104) Compiling lazutils.pas
(3104) Compiling avglvltree.pas
(3104) Compiling laz_avl_tree.pp
/home/wmeyer/lazarus-main/components/lazutils/laz_avl_tree.pp(95,33) Hint: (5024) Parameter "aNode" not used
/home/wmeyer/lazarus-main/components/lazutils/laz_avl_tree.pp(98,30) Hint: (5024) Parameter "aNode" not used
(3104) Compiling lazfileutils.pas
(3104) Compiling lazutf8.pas
(3104) Compiling fpcadds.pas
/home/wmeyer/lazarus-main/components/lazutils/lazutf8.pas(1213,12) Error: (3026) Wrong number of parameters specified for call to "Pos"

The difficulty being that as this is a first attempt at building the IDE, it seems more than a little foolish for me to start editing source code.

[Handoko]

I personally do not agree recommending new users to build from the source, that only will scare many new users away.

Is there any reason for not simply download and run the 3 deb packages?

[wmeyer]

I am a long time Pascal developer. Not scared away, but not positively inspired, either, when a clean build fails.

I have downloaded the three files from sourceforge and am installing.

[MarkMLl]

I am a long time Pascal developer. Not scared away, but not positively inspired, either, when a clean build fails.

Look, there's a mix of problems here.

The first is that you have to understand that Linux distreaux are usually several versions behind with just about /everything/, since they are very reluctant to upgrade fundamental libraries and utilities. Debian is notorious in this area, Ubuntu only marginally better, Arch- as a particular example- much more responsive hence https://archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/lazarus/

Second, when somebody pointed out that you could build from source they should also have discussed the prerequisites with you, and what distro-supplied packages you could usefully uninstall before progressing.

Third, if building from source it is, I'm afraid, /your/ responsibility to make sure that you're using the right compiler version. FPC has a build-time check for this while Lazarus does not... and neither is particularly good at presenting a "this is what you much have" list before the build starts.

MarkMLl

[wmeyer]

Thanks, Mark, but your first point had already been made.

On the option to build from source, I agree, more information was needed, and the wiki was not helpful in that regard, either.

As to your third point, that leads to a chicken/egg issue. Attempting to fulfill my responsibility led me to read with care what the wiki said, which was little.

And will all that said, Handoku's suggestion was the best, and I have installed in two different Linux VMs with no difficulty.

My thanks to all.

[Zvoni]

*snip*  make bigide failed, *snip*

Free Pascal Compiler version 3.0.4+dfsg-23 [2019/11/25] for x86_64
*snip*

...and there (in bold) is your reason it failed: You're using the (outdated) FPC-compiler from Ubuntu-Repository
As others said: Download the three deb's, or use fpcupdeluxe

EDIT: you pulled Lazarus-Main from gitlab
Don't remember, if "Main" is "trunk" or "stable"

[MarkMLl]

As to your third point, that leads to a chicken/egg issue. Attempting to fulfill my responsibility led me to read with care what the wiki said, which was little.

Remember that the wiki, per se., is neither authoritative nor comprehensive. However it /does/ have this page:

https://wiki.freepascal.org/Category:Release_Notes

Those release notes- and note that there's one set for the FPC compiler and another for the Lazarus IDE which in principle includes the LCL class library, /is/ authoritative and in principle at least is comprehensive :-)

I've occasionally ended up in arguments with the core developers after some facet of the compiler's behaviour has changed, only to (eventually) have had it pointed out to me that if I'd read the release note I'd have been aware of it. At least in your case the change resulted in a syntax error :-)

MarkMLl

[Zvoni]

Mark,
i just flew over the Release notes:
Maybe as an (discussable) idea: Include (as the First line/Chapter) the FPC-Version you need for this Lazarus-Version, if you want to compile yourself
(because the required FPC-Version is NOT mentioned.... or i'm too blind to see it)

Yes, i know: In the forum itself they announce the new Lazarus-Versions, and with which FPC-Version it has been compiled.
But they don't say, if that particular FPC-Version is mandatory

[PascalDragon]

Yes, i know: In the forum itself they announce the new Lazarus-Versions, and with which FPC-Version it has been compiled.
But they don't say, if that particular FPC-Version is mandatory

The current and the last release of FPC are supported for Lazarus (the current one is usually used to build the release).

[MarkMLl]

i just flew over the Release notes:
Maybe as an (discussable) idea: Include (as the First line/Chapter) the FPC-Version you need for this Lazarus-Version, if you want to compile yourself
(because the required FPC-Version is NOT mentioned.... or i'm too blind to see it)

Yes, i know: In the forum itself they announce the new Lazarus-Versions, and with which FPC-Version it has been compiled.
But they don't say, if that particular FPC-Version is mandatory

Well, I /did/ say that I perhaps wasn't as thorough with them as I ought to be... I normally focus on the "changes" documents.

I have in the past posted a cross-reference of Lazarus versions against their preferred FPC version, but I must admit that the enforced move to Git etc. dampened my enthusiasm considerably.

It's probably too much to expect anybody to edit all of those documents to include versioning info, but what should be possible would be a single "preferred versions" document appearing in that category. I presume that that would need the approval of the core developers to make sure that it was left in posted and maintained.

Later: https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,50793.msg371643.html#msg371643 was mostly compiled when I was trying to test various things against multiple platforms and versions. There's two or three nasty inflections in Lazarus when backwards compatibility was broken (changes in Synedit and tabbed notebook controls, change in project file format) that are probably also noteworthy.

MarkMLl

[winni]

Hi!

Use the right Linux distro.

Suse Tumbleweed is only three or four days behind the official stable releases. Then you get a new Lazarus or fpc version. Without problems.

Winni

[PeterBB]

Use the right Linux distro.

Arch is usually pretty up to date. They had 2.2.2 packaged in early June.
https://archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/lazarus/


Perhaps the title of this thread should really be "why are some Linux distributions so far behind on Lazarus"

Cheers,
Peter