Discussion:
Request for an interim release of the 3.0 branch
Add Reply
Bart
2017-04-24 12:17:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi,

The 3.0.2 release has a serious regression: it does not generate
lineinfo, at least on linux i386/x86-64.

See: http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=31629 and this discussion
on this ML: http://lists.freepascal.org/pipermail/fpc-devel/2017-April/037695.html

The issue makes the 3.0.2 compiler almost useless for development on
the affected platforms.

The issue is fixed by merging r33007, 33008, 33561 and 34384 (unit exeinfo).
Probably r35886 should be merged as well.

I would propose to release a 3.0.2a version for the affected platforms
which includes the above revisions (and probably nothing else, since
AFAIK this is the only major regression).

Personally I have solved it by rebuilding fpc from the 3.0.2 source
with exeinfo patched.
Not everybody is able to do so though, nor should we insist that an
average user (let alone a novice) does so.

There has been a long time period between the release of 3.0.0 (sep
2015) and 3.0.2 (feb 2017).
A 3.0.4 release does not seem to be scheduled yet.

Further more Lazarus also ships with the 3.0.2 release (since the
Lazarus 1.6.4 release).

Not being able to have proper debugging info might reflect poorly on
both FreePascal and Lazarus and scare away new users, especially if it
would take a long time to release a fix.

The only alternative would be to advise *nix users to use the 3.0.0
release instead.

Bart
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-***@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-de
Mattias Gaertner
2017-04-26 11:01:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 14:17:46 +0200
Post by Bart
[...]
Not being able to have proper debugging info might reflect poorly on
both FreePascal and Lazarus and scare away new users, especially if it
would take a long time to release a fix.
+1
Post by Bart
The only alternative would be to advise *nix users to use the 3.0.0
release instead.
Mattias
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-***@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailma
Marco van de Voort
2017-04-26 13:17:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bart
The issue is fixed by merging r33007, 33008, 33561 and 34384 (unit exeinfo).
Probably r35886 should be merged as well.
These revs ( but not 35886) are merged in the fixes branch a few days back
when I saw the bugreport about the issue, please test.


_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-***@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-deve
Bart
2017-04-26 15:16:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marco van de Voort
These revs ( but not 35886) are merged in the fixes branch a few days back
when I saw the bugreport about the issue, please test.
I have tested exeinfo of r33007,33008,33561,34384 (I left all other
sourcecode of 3.0.2 as is) and all these revisions generate lineinfo
as expected.

Bart
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-***@lists.freepascal.org
http:/
Benito van der Zander
2017-04-27 08:07:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi,

r35545, too ? (http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=31135)



Bye,
Benito
Post by Marco van de Voort
Post by Bart
The issue is fixed by merging r33007, 33008, 33561 and 34384 (unit exeinfo).
Probably r35886 should be merged as well.
These revs ( but not 35886) are merged in the fixes branch a few days back
when I saw the bugreport about the issue, please test.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Marco van de Voort
2017-04-28 14:05:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Benito van der Zander
r35545, too ? (http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=31135)
I need some report on the safety of merging from a compiler dev for that, I
don't merge compiler revs on my own
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-***@lists.freepascal.org
http://l
Florian Klämpfl
2017-04-28 19:16:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marco van de Voort
Post by Benito van der Zander
r35545, too ? (http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=31135)
I need some report on the safety of merging from a compiler dev for that, I
don't merge compiler revs on my own
It is invasive, but so far arm builds look good to me.

_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-***@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Yury Sidorov
2017-04-30 18:51:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Florian Klämpfl
Post by Marco van de Voort
Post by Benito van der Zander
r35545, too ? (http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=31135)
I need some report on the safety of merging from a compiler dev for that, I
don't merge compiler revs on my own
It is invasive, but so far arm builds look good to me.
If you merge r35545, you need also merge r35552 - it is a post-fix for r35545.

Yury.
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-***@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-

Loading...