[fpc-devel] DF64 BSD -- FPC running natively but argument address mangling prevents bootstrap

John Marino fpc-devel at marino.st
Thu Nov 20 11:54:36 CET 2014

On 11/18/2014 17:49, Sven Barth wrote:
> Am 18.11.2014 15:17 schrieb "John Marino" <fpc-devel at marino.st
> <mailto:fpc-devel at marino.st>>:
>> On 11/18/2014 14:43, Sven Barth wrote:
>> > Am 18.11.2014 13:46 schrieb "John Marino" <fpc-devel at marino.st
> <mailto:fpc-devel at marino.st>
>> > <mailto:fpc-devel at marino.st <mailto:fpc-devel at marino.st>>>:
>> >>
>> >> Hi guys,
>> >> I've spent a couple of days porting FPC to DragonFly BSD with some
>> >> success.
>> > [...]
>> >> > bin/fpc -i
>> >>         Free Pascal Compiler version 2.6.4
>> >
>> > I can't help you much with your specific problen, but new targets should
>> > be added to the development version of FPC (in this case 2.7.1) and not
>> > the release. Afterall you'll need to port it sooner or later to that
>> > version anyway and especially in the current case (2.6.4 vs 2.7.1) quite
>> > some changes happened.
>> > Additionally we (core developers) only work with the development version
>> > anyway (the release compiler is basically only used for compiling
>> > trunk), so it will be easier for us to help you as well.
>> >
>> It doesn't matter, I'll just have to do it twice.
>> I have to patch the latest release -- otherwise we won't get it until
>> the next release and subsequent import into ports.  Plus it's more
>> important to get FPC bootstrapped at this point.
> If you get it working with trunk fast enough then there might even be a
> remote chance that it will be on the next release, that will be branched
> soon (no guarantees though).
>> I think the patches would apply to a dev branch without too much trouble
>> though.
> In trunk there are quite some changes in the RTL, because of the
> introduction of codepage aware strings and RawByteString. I don't know
> in how far the specialized Posix RTLs are affected there (e.g. Linux,
> FreeBSD, etc. instead of the base directories bsd and unix), but you
> should be aware that it might involve a bit more work.

Hi Sven,
I'm mainly done.
I was planning to provide 3 patch sets:
  1) rtl/dragonfly (all new, minus Makefile.fpc)
  2) changes to existing files
  3) Regenerated Makefile and *.inc files

I am hesitating on 3).  I got the trunk fpcmake built and it generates
Makefiles nicely (the -r option doesn't work, so I wrote a script for
that).  However there are tons of these, and some of the makefiles
aren't even current now (e.g. they weren't regenerated for aros, mipsel,
etc).  So I am guessing I should not provide these and just the
assume the committer will regenerate the makefiles.

What about any .ini files?  Will somebody else regen the derivative .inc
files too?


More information about the fpc-devel mailing list