Sign in Join

Live chat for Free Pascal, Lazarus, Delphi and every Pascal programmer.

Mailing lists / fpc-pascal / 2012-01

Request for Win32 bootstrap compiler on ftp.freepascal.org/

12 messages · 4 people ·

Reply by email Subscribe to this list Your subscription

Read-only archive. Use j and k to move between messages.

Reinier Olislagers

Hi list,

On ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/dist/2.6.0/bootstrap/ there are a lot of bootstrap compilers, but I miss a x86 Windows bootstrap compiler.

Would it be possible to upload one, or can I use the 2.4.2 compiler to compile FPC 2.6.x/2.7.x sources on Windows?

Thanks,
Reinier

Reply by email

Marco van de Voort
to Reinier Olislagers

In our previous episode, Reinier Olislagers said:

On ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/dist/2.6.0/bootstrap/ there are a lot of bootstrap compilers, but I miss a x86 Windows bootstrap compiler.

It is the responsibility of the platform maintainers to upload that.

That being said, for windows it makes less sense than for other platforms, since the release also contains (possibly updated) binutils.

Would it be possible to upload one, or can I use the 2.4.2 compiler to compile FPC 2.6.x/2.7.x sources on Windows?

It will probably work atm, but can stop to fail at any moment, so in general I immediately update the bootstrap compiler if I notice it is not the recommended version. Small effort, and avoids some confusion when it stops working.

Anyway, since I had a win32 2.6.0 install on this system I zipped and uploaded the exe.

Reply by email

Reinier Olislagers
to Marco van de Voort
Marco van de Voort wrote 8 lines
In our previous episode, Reinier Olislagers said: > On ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/dist/2.6.0/bootstrap/ there are a > lot of bootstrap compilers, but I miss a x86 Windows bootstrap compiler. It is the responsibility of the platform maintainers to upload that. That being said, for windows it makes less sense than for other platforms, since the release also contains (possibly updated) binutils.

Ok. I'm wondering whether the 2.6 release version gives the same binutils as the ones available at
http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpcbuild/trunk/install/binw32/...

<snip>

Anyway, since I had a win32 2.6.0 install on this system I zipped and uploaded the exe.

Thanks,
Reinier

Reply by email

Marco van de Voort
to Reinier Olislagers

In our previous episode, Reinier Olislagers said:

Show quoted text 7 lines
> It is the responsibility of the platform maintainers to upload that. > > That being said, for windows it makes less sense than for other platforms, > since the release also contains (possibly updated) binutils. Ok. I'm wondering whether the 2.6 release version gives the same binutils as the ones available at http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpcbuild/trunk/install/binw32/...

_Probably_ the same. But the ones from 2.6.0 are the _guaranteed_ working ones.

Reply by email

Reinier Olislagers
to Marco van de Voort
Marco van de Voort wrote 11 lines
In our previous episode, Reinier Olislagers said: >> It is the responsibility of the platform maintainers to upload that. >> >> That being said, for windows it makes less sense than for other platforms, >> since the release also contains (possibly updated) binutils. > Ok. I'm wondering whether the 2.6 release version gives the same > binutils as the ones available at > http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpcbuild/trunk/install/binw32/... _Probably_ the same. But the ones from 2.6.0 are the _guaranteed_ working ones.

Bedankt Marco,

That's what I suspected. So when building a Win32 system from scratch, I'd have to either extract the files from the installer or perhaps get them from a stable branch like:
http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpcbuild/branches/fixes_2_6/install/binw32/

Facepalm - could have saved you the trouble of typing.... I knew this... Just need more coffee I guess....

Thanks again,
Reinier

Reply by email

Marco van de Voort
to Reinier Olislagers

In our previous episode, Reinier Olislagers said:

Show quoted text 11 lines
>> binutils as the ones available at >> http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpcbuild/trunk/install/binw32/... > > _Probably_ the same. But the ones from 2.6.0 are the _guaranteed_ working > ones. That's what I suspected. So when building a Win32 system from scratch, I'd have to either extract the files from the installer or perhaps get them from a stable branch like: http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpcbuild/branches/fixes_2_6/install/binw32/

No, tags/release_2_6_0 would then be the one. What is currently already in fixed could theoretically already have been changed for 2.6.2

Reply by email

Reinier Olislagers
to Marco van de Voort
Marco van de Voort wrote 9 lines
In our previous episode, Reinier Olislagers said: > That's what I suspected. So when building a Win32 system from scratch, > I'd have to either extract the files from the installer or perhaps get > them from a stable branch like: > http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpcbuild/branches/fixes_2_6/install/binw32/ No, tags/release_2_6_0 would then be the one. What is currently already in fixed could theoretically already have been changed for 2.6.2

Thanks, Marco; I thought 2.6.1 fixes would be stability improvements to 2.6.

Changing my SVN downloader as we speak...

Regards,
Reinier

Reply by email

Marco van de Voort
to Reinier Olislagers

In our previous episode, Reinier Olislagers said:

Show quoted text 6 lines
> > No, tags/release_2_6_0 would then be the one. What is currently already in > fixed could theoretically already have been changed for 2.6.2 > Thanks, Marco; I thought 2.6.1 fixes would be stability improvements to 2.6.

True. But bootstrapping is attuned to the situation of the last release only. And only the last release.

Note that I don't expect that many problems, since the mutation rate in this field is very low (and even more so on Windows where there is also the internal linker).

But, again, the only guaranteed bootstrap options is the last release. Trying to cut corners here, can lead to trouble in communicating over problems (both build problems as bugs), so I suggest to follow this as much as possible.

One can try to cut corners, but that will only end up having to install the release anyway at the first hickup.

Reply by email

Reinier Olislagers
to Marco van de Voort
Marco van de Voort wrote 10 lines
In our previous episode, Reinier Olislagers said: >> >> No, tags/release_2_6_0 would then be the one. What is currently already in >> fixed could theoretically already have been changed for 2.6.2 >> > Thanks, Marco; I thought 2.6.1 fixes would be stability improvements to > 2.6. True. But bootstrapping is attuned to the situation of the last release only. And only the last release.

<snip>

One can try to cut corners, but that will only end up having to install the release anyway at the first hickup.

Ok, I'll just let my program do the hard work... without cutting corners ;)

https://bitbucket.org/reiniero/fpcup

Thanks,
Reinier

Reply by email

Vincent Snijders
to Marco van de Voort: In our previous episode, Reinier Olislagers said: True. But bootstrapping is attuned to…

Op 27 januari 2012 14:00 heeft Marco van de Voort
het volgende geschreven:

One can try to cut corners, but that will only end up having to install the release anyway at the first hickup.

I'd expect the utils in fpcbuild/trunk to be able to build fpc/trunk better than the release ones, otherwise they should not be committed to fpcbuild/trunk.

Vincent

Reply by email

Marco van de Voort
to Vincent Snijders

In our previous episode, Vincent Snijders said:

Show quoted text 6 lines
> One can try to cut corners, but that will only end up having to install the > release anyway at the first hickup. I'd expect the utils in fpcbuild/trunk to be able to build fpc/trunk better than the release ones, otherwise they should not be committed to fpcbuild/trunk.

Sometimes binutils are committed to trunk, but not merged back for testing purposes.

Moreover this hasn't already been the case in the past. Prior to 2.4.x, not everything was merged through trunk, this was particularly the case for release related stuff, so fixes could easily contain more recent binutils.

This improved during the 2.2.x releasecycle, and starting with the 2.4.0 fixes branch everything was done through trunk.

Reply by email

Tomas Hajny
to Vincent Snijders: Op 27 januari 2012 14:00 heeft Marco van de Voort het volgende geschreven: I'd expect the…
Vincent Snijders wrote 9 lines
Op 27 januari 2012 14:00 heeft Marco van de Voort het volgende geschreven: > One can try to cut corners, but that will only end up having to install > the > release anyway at the first hickup. I'd expect the utils in fpcbuild/trunk to be able to build fpc/trunk better than the release ones, otherwise they should not be committed to fpcbuild/trunk.

I believe that the original discussion was about bootstrapping. Binutils committed to trunk may not be tested completely for all scenarios (similarly to everything else within trunk). New binutils may e.g. be necessary for some new compiler feature (e.g. for assembling for a new CPU generation not supported by the previous release if the trunk compiler contains new support for this new CPU generation), but the released binutils should be those guaranteed to compile trunk.

Tomas

Reply by email