[Pkg-pascal-devel] lazarus 1.2.6

[Paul Gevers]

On 06-11-14 11:15, Dimitrios Chr. Ioannidis wrote:
> Στις 01-11-2014 12:11, Paul Gevers έγραψε:
>> On 01-11-14 09:32, Paul Gevers wrote:
>>> On 01-11-14 09:15, Dimitrios Chr. Ioannidis wrote:
>>>> This is the main reason that made me to join here. Lack of backport.
>>>
>>> Ok, so basically you offered to help to get the backport running. As far
>>> as I can tell, the backport for wheezy should just work, so I will (try
>>> to) build and upload shortly. If you commit to help with possible
>>> problems in the backport I believe we have the manpower right there for
>>> the wheezy backport.
>>
>> Oh, one generic question to the team. I think backporting Lazarus only
>> makes sense using the backported versions of fpc, right? So the latest
>> Lazarus with the old fpc is neither tested nor supported?
> 
> AFAIK, there is no problem to use Lazarus 1.2.6 with the 2.6.0 ( and
> just to be sure
> I asked in the lists ) but why anyone wants to do that ?

It is not a matter of anybody wanting to do it. I want the package to be
technically correct. On backports, if we want to build against the fpc
package in backports, we need to declare that dependency, else it will
be build against the version in the normal achieve. Backports don't
automatically "pollute" AFAICT. So unless we force lazarus to build
against at least fpc 2.6.4+dfsg, it will be build with 2.6.0. What do we
think is the right thing to do?

By the way, fpc was build, uploaded and excepted in the backports
archive. For the build logs, see [1]. Testing it is appreciated and
would be a great contribution to the backporting effort.

Paul

[1]
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=fpc&suite=wheezy-backports

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-pascal-devel/attachments/20141106/f2fdb8e6/attachment.sig>