[fpc-devel] buildfaq

Hans-Peter Diettrich DrDiettrich1 at aol.com
Wed Aug 4 15:30:09 CEST 2010

Henry Vermaak schrieb:

>> 2) An unqualified reference (PP=mypp) most proably fails - where exactly
>> does Make search for that compiler?
> See Makefile from line 109 onwards.  It first looks for fpc(.exe) on the 
> path.  If it finds that, it gets the real compiler exe with -PB.  If 
> fpc(.exe) isn't found, it tries to find ppc386(.exe) on the path.

I'm not very familiar with the make syntax :-(

Why ppc386, on a 64 bit platform?

Should I copy or add a link, from ppc386.exe to ppcx64.exe?

>> 5) A matter of convenience: Currently the easiest way to get both FPC
>> and Lazarus up (on a Windows system) is the installation of Lazarus
>> 0.9.28, including FPC 2.2.4 and all required build tools. That's the
>> latest Lazarus/FPC distribution, available for almost all platforms,
>> that runs off the shelf. Unfortunately the 2.2.4 compiler can not
>> compile the 2.5 sources, so that another binary must be installed. In
>> the worst case multiple (make and install) steps are required, until the
>> 2.5 sources can be compiled by a 2.4 version - including all the RTL
>> stuff. Can we get some more version compatibility?
> On Windows, I usually install latest fpc release, then I check out 
> lazarus and build it.  That's pretty simple, no?

Installing the latest fpc release is anything but simple :-(

The (currently) last problem is the new fpc.exe, which assumes a 32 bit 
target, and tries to invoke the (non existing) ppc386.exe. The old 2.2.4 
fpc.exe, that came with Lazarus 0.9.28, seems to work properly. But I 
don't want to test more, instead I simply copied the new ppcx64.exe to 
ppc386.exe :-)


More information about the fpc-devel mailing list