Scripts to generate oficial FPC and Lazarus deb packages

[dbannon]

Then I'm not understanding what you want to do differently wrt debian packages? Anyway, I see that there are no DEBS on the FPC site for FPC 3.2.2.

Maybe this is not the time and place to discuss but a Debian source package contains only source and config files, no binary. You can then take that package to any (supported) platform and, single command line, produce a binary deb ready to install. Use of a source package has nothing to do with the funny things debian do differently during their packing.

Code: [Select]

C:\repo\fpcbuild>make help

Targets
all Alias for build
build Build a new compiler and all packages
install Install newly build files
zipinstall Create a zip/tar archive for every package
singlezipinstall
Create a single zip/tar archive
crosszipinstall
Build a cross compiler and create zip/tar for every package
crosssinglezipinstall
Build a cross compiler and a create single zip/tar archive

Distribution Targets:
rpm Build linux .rpm packages
deb Build linux .deb packages
inno Build Windows (Innosetup) based installer
innox64 Build Win32-Win64 cross compiler installer
innox86x64 Build Windows (Innosetup) combined installer for Win32 and Win64
innoce Build Win32-Wince cross compiler installer
innomsdos Build Win32-MsDos cross compiler installer
innoandroid Build Win32-Android cross compiler installer
tar Build .tar installer

FV based installer Targets:
go32v2zip Build .zip files for go32v2
os2zip Build .zip files for OS/2
sourcezip Build .zip files for the sources


Code: Pascal  [Select][+][-]

1. dbannon@dell:~/bin/FPC/SRC/fpc-3.2.3$ make help
2.  
3. Targets
4. all Build a new compiler and all packages
5. install Install newly build files
6. zipinstall Create zip/tar of installed files
7. singlezipinstall Alias for zipinstall

On the other hand, typing "make tab tab" in a bash terminal opened to your Makefile shows a lot of potential targets, some dummies, some perhaps not supported etc. I, personally was hoping for some specific definitions of some things on my crosscompile line but resorted to the trial and error mode. I am way from makefile literate, they terrorize me, so read the source is no help. Besides, its long !

I have an hunch you ran make help on the normal, not the fpcbuild repo.

Maybe the difference between a normal and fpcbuild file is another one of those things beyond my gaze 

Davo

[robert rozee]

Here are the generated deb files:
[...]
fpc-laz_3.2.2-210709_amd64.deb      2026-02-22   39.3 MB
fpc-src_3.2.2-210709_amd64.deb      2026-02-22   30.6 MB
lazarus-project_4.6.0-0_amd64.deb   2026-02-22   157.0 MB

Are the scripts to generate oficial FPC and Lazarus deb packages available? If so, where?

Valdir: you ask a perfectly valid question, to which there seems to be a concerted effort to not provide a straight answer.

let's re-frame the request:

Dear FPC development team,
    we suspect there may be some great evil embedded in the above mentioned .deb files. In order to disprove this suspicion, we need to be able to regenerate those files from scratch. Can someone from you team please reveal to us:
(a) who generated those .deb files?
(b) where we can find the script(s) used in the .deb file generation?

We need this to carry out a security audit. If unable to carry out this audit, it will be necessary for the affected software to be permanently removed from every governmental computer in the Greater European Union. We hope you can understand the gravity of the situation and respond with haste.

does the above provide sufficient reason to answer Valdir's extremely simply and unambiguous question? and if the answer is "we do not know" then i expect to see those .deb files removed from public access with blinding speed!


cheers,
rob   

[dsiders]

Here are the generated deb files:
[...]
fpc-laz_3.2.2-210709_amd64.deb      2026-02-22   39.3 MB
fpc-src_3.2.2-210709_amd64.deb      2026-02-22   30.6 MB
lazarus-project_4.6.0-0_amd64.deb   2026-02-22   157.0 MB

Are the scripts to generate oficial FPC and Lazarus deb packages available? If so, where?

Valdir: you ask a perfectly valid question, to which there seems to be a concerted effort to not provide a straight answer.

let's re-frame the request:

Dear FPC development team,
    we suspect there may be some great evil embedded in the above mentioned .deb files. In order to disprove this suspicion, we need to be able to regenerate those files from scratch. Can someone from you team please reveal to us:
(a) who generated those .deb files?
(b) where we can find the script(s) used in the .deb file generation?

We need this to carry out a security audit. If unable to carry out this audit, it will be necessary for the affected software to be permanently removed from every governmental computer in the Greater European Union. We hope you can understand the gravity of the situation and respond with haste.

does the above provide sufficient reason to answer Valdir's extremely simply and unambiguous question? and if the answer is "we do not know" then i expect to see those .deb files removed from public access with blinding speed!


cheers,
rob   

If you had bothered to read replies #1 and #2 you'd know that the question is not unambiguous... and conspiracy theories are unwarranted.

[marcov]

let's re-frame the request:

Dear FPC development team,

Ok, listening

    we suspect there may be some great evil embedded in the above mentioned .deb files. In order to disprove this suspicion, we need to be able to regenerate those files from scratch. Can someone from you team please reveal to us:
(a) who generated those .deb files?

Are they on the FPC download site? No, then they are not generated by FPC.

(b) where we can find the script(s) used in the .deb file generation?

Ask the people that generated them. As said, whatever script was used, the one in fpcbuild was probably the rough template.

We need this to carry out a security audit.

If you care about security, then don't download binaries if you don't even know who generated them.

[robert rozee]

[...]
Are they on the FPC download site? No, then they are not generated by FPC.
[...]
Ask the people that generated them. As said, whatever script was used, the one in fpcbuild was probably the rough template.
[...]
If you care about security, then don't download binaries if you don't even know who generated them.

going to https://www.freepascal.org/download.html you find a page containing the heading "Official releases". this page contains links to sub-pages on the freepascal.org website that in turn provide links to SourceForge where .rpm packages for FPC can be downloaded. notably, there are no .deb packages available via this route.

going to https://lazarus.freepascal.org/ (that automatically redirects to https://www.lazarus-ide.org/) you can find a link to a page titled "Downloads": https://www.lazarus-ide.org/index.php?page=downloads. this page contains links to SourceForge where .deb packages for FPC can be downloaded. at the bottom of the https://www.lazarus-ide.org/index.php?page=downloads page is a message reading "© 1993-2026 Lazarus and Free Pascal Team".

so:
(a) technically, you are right marcov. it looks like the FPC team's site only links to .rpm package downloads, while the Lazarus team's site provides links to .deb package downloads. i owe you an apology   

(b) the copyright message, reading "© 1993-2026 Lazarus and Free Pascal Team" appears to be misleading, if not fraudulent, insofar as it implies an 'endorsement' for the .deb packages from the Free Pascal Team, where that entity is in fact NOT the same as the FPC Developers as understood in the present discussion.

(c) Valdir, it looks like your initial question needs to be directed to the Lazarus developers, as they seem to be the ones distributing .deb packages of FPC. any attribution of responsibility for or ownership of the .deb packages to the FPC developers is false.

marcov, is my summary correct?


cheers,
rob   

[valdir.marcos]

Here are the generated deb files:
[...]
fpc-laz_3.2.2-210709_amd64.deb      2026-02-22   39.3 MB
fpc-src_3.2.2-210709_amd64.deb      2026-02-22   30.6 MB
lazarus-project_4.6.0-0_amd64.deb   2026-02-22   157.0 MB

Are the scripts to generate oficial FPC and Lazarus deb packages available? If so, where?

Valdir: you ask a perfectly valid question, to which there seems to be a concerted effort to not provide a straight answer.

let's re-frame the request:

Dear FPC development team,
    we suspect there may be some great evil embedded in the above mentioned .deb files. In order to disprove this suspicion, we need to be able to regenerate those files from scratch. Can someone from you team please reveal to us:
(a) who generated those .deb files?
(b) where we can find the script(s) used in the .deb file generation?

We need this to carry out a security audit. If unable to carry out this audit, it will be necessary for the affected software to be permanently removed from every governmental computer in the Greater European Union. We hope you can understand the gravity of the situation and respond with haste.

does the above provide sufficient reason to answer Valdir's extremely simply and unambiguous question? and if the answer is "we do not know" then i expect to see those .deb files removed from public access with blinding speed!


cheers,
rob   

If you had bothered to read replies #1 and #2 you'd know that the question is not unambiguous... and conspiracy theories are unwarranted.

@dsiders
Please, explain how the opening of this topic [reproduced sic below] can be considered ambiguous.

Here are the generated deb files:

Lazarus Bugfix Release 4.6
https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,73549.0.html

Lazarus Linux amd64 DEB / Lazarus 4.0
https://sourceforge.net/projects/lazarus/files/Lazarus%20Linux%20amd64%20DEB/Lazarus%204.0/

fpc-laz_3.2.2-210709_amd64.deb      2026-02-22   39.3 MB
fpc-src_3.2.2-210709_amd64.deb      2026-02-22   30.6 MB
lazarus-project_4.6.0-0_amd64.deb   2026-02-22   157.0 MB


Are the scripts to generate oficial FPC and Lazarus deb packages available?

If so, where?

@dsiders
Replies #1 and #2 are also reproduced sic below.

Please, proofread my initial merssage and the two replies you've cited again.

I am talking about https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org and https://sourceforge.net/projects/lazarus deb files and both @marcov and @PeterBB are talking about https://debian.org deb files.

Can you realize that I'm talking about apples and both @marcov and @PeterBB are talking about oranges?

Afaik for FPC, debian has own scripts, but they are based on the FPC scripts in the fpcbuild repository.

I think that you can download debian's package script on the package page of debian, or at least you could a decade ago :-)

Are the scripts to generate oficial FPC and Lazarus deb packages available?

If so, where?

If you mean Debian's packages of FPC & Lazarus (as opposed to FPC & Lazarus's deb packages)
this might help
https://wiki.debian.org/BuildingTutorial

(You need to be running a Debian system, as several Debian specific tools are used)

The respective package pages are here;
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/fpc
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/lazarus

Cheers,
Peter

[Thausand]

They is store in source-tree lazarus

[valdir.marcos]

I dare to suggest that the way Debian does it might be worth considering.....

It does not. Uninstalling the source deb, doesn't install the built parts. 

Sorry marcov, I really do not understand your answer. You do not Uninstall a source deb (nor install it for that matter). A source deb is used to make binary debs which can be installed and, given the right content, uninstalled.

Then I'm not understanding what you want to do differently wrt debian packages? Anyway, I see that there are no DEBS on the FPC site for FPC 3.2.2.

That is an anomaly, that used to be there for every release. The debs on the lazarus site are own builds from Lazarus, not official FPC ones.

let's re-frame the request:

Dear FPC development team,

Ok, listening

    we suspect there may be some great evil embedded in the above mentioned .deb files. In order to disprove this suspicion, we need to be able to regenerate those files from scratch. Can someone from you team please reveal to us:
(a) who generated those .deb files?

Are they on the FPC download site? No, then they are not generated by FPC.

(b) where we can find the script(s) used in the .deb file generation?

Ask the people that generated them. As said, whatever script was used, the one in fpcbuild was probably the rough template.

We need this to carry out a security audit.

If you care about security, then don't download binaries if you don't even know who generated them.

[...]
Are they on the FPC download site? No, then they are not generated by FPC.
[...]
Ask the people that generated them. As said, whatever script was used, the one in fpcbuild was probably the rough template.
[...]
If you care about security, then don't download binaries if you don't even know who generated them.

going to https://www.freepascal.org/download.html you find a page containing the heading "Official releases". this page contains links to sub-pages on the freepascal.org website that in turn provide links to SourceForge where .rpm packages for FPC can be downloaded. notably, there are no .deb packages available via this route.

going to https://lazarus.freepascal.org/ (that automatically redirects to https://www.lazarus-ide.org/) you can find a link to a page titled "Downloads": https://www.lazarus-ide.org/index.php?page=downloads. this page contains links to SourceForge where .deb packages for FPC can be downloaded. at the bottom of the https://www.lazarus-ide.org/index.php?page=downloads page is a message reading "© 1993-2026 Lazarus and Free Pascal Team".

so:
(a) technically, you are right marcov. it looks like the FPC team's site only links to .rpm package downloads, while the Lazarus team's site provides links to .deb package downloads. i owe you an apology   

(b) the copyright message, reading "© 1993-2026 Lazarus and Free Pascal Team" appears to be misleading, if not fraudulent, insofar as it implies an 'endorsement' for the .deb packages from the Free Pascal Team, where that entity is in fact NOT the same as the FPC Developers as understood in the present discussion.

(c) Valdir, it looks like your initial question needs to be directed to the Lazarus developers, as they seem to be the ones distributing .deb packages of FPC. any attribution of responsibility for or ownership of the .deb packages to the FPC developers is false.

marcov, is my summary correct?


cheers,
rob   

I've included two other previous messages here so that my response makes sense.

I've highlighted the relevant parts in the messages above.

...
(c) Valdir, it looks like your initial question needs to be directed to the Lazarus developers, as they seem to be the ones distributing .deb packages of FPC. any attribution of responsibility for or ownership of the .deb packages to the FPC developers is false.
...

@robert rozee

Due to some unknown problem, the FPC project website has not provided a DEB file for installing FPC 3.2.2 on Debian and Ubuntu-based distributions for many years.

However, the Lazarus project provides both the DEB file for Lazarus and FPC (binary and source code).

The fact that this DEB file for installing FPC 3.2.2 does not exist on the FPC project website, but only exists on the Lazarus project website, is misleading.

I believed, and many others did as well, that the files "fpc-laz_3.2.2-210709_amd64.deb" and "fpc-src_3.2.2-210709_amd64.deb" were official for both the FPC and Lazarus projects. This is neither my fault nor of the Lazarus project.

I believe the Lazarus project is taking correctly that initiative with the good intention of helping programmers install Lazarus without major problems.

Having said all that, I can finally comment on your statement directed to me:

From the beginning, I correctly directed my message to the "Lazarus »Forum »Installation »Linux" section instead of "Lazarus »Forum »Free Pascal »Unix".

Lazarus »Forum »Installation »Linux
https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/board,1.0.html

Lazarus »Forum »Free Pascal »Unix
https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/board,66.0.html

I correctly directed my question to the Lazarus team, but @marcov is responding on behalf of the FPC team. I am not the one confusing apples and oranges in this thread.

I still believe my question is legitimate. And none of the 21 answers so far have led me to a solution.

For now, I'm reverse engineering the files "fpc-laz_3.2.2-210709_amd64.deb" and "fpc-src_3.2.2-210709_amd64.deb" to find out how they were built.

[marcov]

(b) the copyright message, reading "© 1993-2026 Lazarus and Free Pascal Team" appears to be misleading, if not fraudulent, insofar as it implies an 'endorsement' for the .deb packages from the Free Pascal Team, where that entity is in fact NOT the same as the FPC Developers as understood in the present discussion.

FPC holds copyright over the FPC sources, even if a different binary is generated. So I think this gaslighting about "fraudulent" and  "endorsement" etc is not warranted. The url contains  /project/lazarus, that should be enough, in doubt people can always ask.

marcov, is my summary correct?

After your post. Thausend commented that the debian package files are in Lazarus repo. That jogged my memory, and indeed they are in lazarus/tools/install. So anybody that searched for "debian" in the lazarus tree would have found them.  It is all much ado about nothing.

[robert rozee]

[...] Thausend commented that the debian package files are in Lazarus repo. That jogged my memory, and indeed they are in lazarus/tools/install [...]

and indeed:

user@user-DH61BE:/usr/share/lazarus/3.6.0/tools/install$ ls -l *deb.*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 11354 Sep 29  2024 create_fpc_deb.sh
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root    52 Sep 29  2024 create_fpc-src_deb.sh
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  8576 Sep 29  2024 create_lazarus_deb.sh
user@user-DH61BE:/usr/share/lazarus/3.6.0/tools/install$

it only took, like, 23 messages to get a straight answer!

Valdir: do these scripts look like the real deal?


cheers,
rob   :-)

[dbannon]

Yep, that looks like it, I looked at the fpc one. Grabs the source, builds it, makes a control file, puts things in appropriate places and calls dpkg-deb. Seems a lot simpler than my system, hmm...

And can build for platforms ranging from i386 to Spark. Pretty neat.

Davo

[dsiders]

Yep, that looks like it, I looked at the fpc one. Grabs the source, builds it, makes a control file, puts things in appropriate places and calls dpkg-deb. Seems a lot simpler than my system, hmm...

And can build for platforms ranging from i386 to Spark. Pretty neat.

Davo

Sssh... you're ruining the conspiracy  theory.

[robert rozee]

Sssh... you're ruining the conspiracy  theory.

there is no conspiracy going on. it is just that despite being highly evolved, and our pretense of being civilized, at the heart of it we are all just a collection of male animals.

and when you put a collection of male animals together, the law of the jungle takes over; the moment one member shows any sign of weakness, all the others will attack. this attack will be vicious, as holding back is in itself a sign of weakness and so a cue for becoming the next victim.

online, the carnage is more subtle: one of the group asks a question, seeks an answer to something that puzzles him. the ensuing melee consists of responses like: "RTFM" (being shouted), comments of "It is obvious" and "If you had bothered to read...", and offerings with great gusto of answers to questions other than the one originally asked. the goal of the attack is to reduce the victim, to make them feel small, unintelligent, unimportant. meanwhile the attackers gain a sense of importance and superiority.


cheers,
rob.

[valdir.marcos]

They is store in source-tree lazarus

Thanks.

[valdir.marcos]

Yep, that looks like it, I looked at the fpc one. Grabs the source, builds it, makes a control file, puts things in appropriate places and calls dpkg-deb. Seems a lot simpler than my system, hmm...

And can build for platforms ranging from i386 to Spark. Pretty neat.

Davo

Thanks.