[fpc-pascal] fpc and intel vtune (now about gprof)

Tomas Hajny XHajT03 at mbox.vol.cz
Tue Apr 25 18:23:06 CEST 2006

> maybe shipping with FPC cygwin runtime libraries for gprof wouldn't harm?
> Because:
>        1. Some are shipped (for FP --- IDE)
>        2. If I am right, libc, libgcc, libgmon and libkernel32 are needed,
> they shouldn't be weightier than some rarely used binary utils
>        3. Full CYGWIN is not required (as I guess, MINGW is more
> appropriate [its rtl], isn't it?)
>        4. -pg is a compiler option, not some external feature implying
> installation of something

As already mentioned by Jonas - yes, we should probably make it available
somehow, at least as a standalone package. Note that we don't ship other
static libraries either (sorry for a previous confusion - it's libc.a as
correctly pointed out by Jonas, not libc.dll) - the main reason being that
we can't keep in sync with their development (note that this is the case
for libgdb.a needed for our IDE as well). OTOH, if we ship gprof.exe, we
should probably ship the needed libraries and vice versa, it doesn't make
too much sense as it is now...

>> > Bug number is 4929.
>> a valid option. So my statement is still the same - could you be more
>> specific what is wrong, please?
>> Tomas
> Well, it is not a bug.
> I even submitted it as compatibility or something. I do call it a bug,
> because it was marked "Fixed", not "Not a bug".
> BUT:
> 2.0.3 2006.4.20 does not emit warning, nor do I see one in compiler
> messages file. (Maybe you mean "still BUGGY maximum optimize", Ox? [don't
> mix with older comments about "still BUGGY!!!" register optimizations])

OK, _now_ I see what is wrong. The bug is closed as fixed in 2.0.3,
whereas in reality it was only fixed in 2.1.1. So either the fixed version
should be changed in the bug report, or we should add another line to
errore.msg in the fixes branch. Doing the latter is really a cosmetic
change and should have no side effects, hopefully, so it might be probably
the better solution. The only thing I'm not sure about is whether it might
not have impacts to the possibility of merging from trunk - anybody?


More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list