GPC 2006 (Pascal) -- deprecated or "expired"??
rugxulo at gmail.com
Fri Jun 3 04:56:35 UTC 2011
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy at acm.org> wrote:
> On 2011-Jun-01 17:23:37 -0500, Rugxulo <rugxulo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>It seems somebody isn't very knowledgeable about GPC. :-(
>>the real deal: *BSD hates GPL, esp. GPLv3,
> Please stop spreading FUD.
Sorry, not trying to be rude here (honestly), but it is GPLv3, which
clearly is not popular with *BSD. Please don't act like licenses don't
The whole point is, even if GPLv3 isn't your favorite, you shouldn't
throw away GPC without a suitable replacement. Sure, FPC is
semi-related (barely), but it's a whole different dialect, so the code
is NOT compatible!
In other words, if you can temporarily get GPC up to speed, you can
then compile Scott Moore's (ISO 7185) P5 with it, which is public
domain. (FPC won't compile it as-is.) That's better than just dumping
everything in favor of FPC only (incompatible), IMO.
>> and I think GPC is indeed v3
> Does that make you the somebody who "isn't very knowledgeable about GPC"?
Eh? It's definitely GPL v3, here's what my GPC344B.ZIP (DJGPP) has:
37552 09-05-2007 13:29 doc/gpc/copying
Hmmm, I don't know why they don't have patches in the "obvious" place.
Lemme find Waldek's homepage ...
>>BTW, two more corrections: the latest version is not from 2006 but
> Looking at http://www.gnu-pascal.de/gpc (which is listed as the
> project homepage), the latest version shown on the downloads
> page is 20060325.
Their webpage is definitely outdated, I don't know why. But I'm 100%
positive that 20070904 is the latest version.
> Even if there was another release 20070904,
> that is 3½ years ago - which seems to justify the "development
> has ceased" statement in the removal message.
Development has ceased, yes. There were only a handful of maintainers
over the years. Plus the real dealbreaker is that GCC has backend bugs
(and incompatibilities) which the GPC devs either didn't understand or
couldn't afford the time to fix. So it stagnated. Hence "latest" is
only unofficial patches against GCC 3.4.4 (stable) and 4.1.2 (buggy).
>> gpc 20060325_2 lang Deleted on this many watch lists=1 search for
>>ports that depend on this port
>> Deprecated DEPRECATED: development has ceased; use lang/fpc instead
>> Expired This port expired on: 2011-04-11
>> GNU Pascal compiler
>> There is no maintainer for this port.
> "no maintainer" means no-one in the FreeBSD Community has expressed
> any interest in maintaining the port. Each port requires Project
> resources just leave lying around. Since no-one has expressed any
> interest in maintaining this port and the underlying GPC project
> appears to have died, there is no reason to keep it around.
There can't be any big maintenance except making sure it actually
builds, esp. with newer GCCs. Other than that, I see no problems here.
"No reason to keep it around" is silly. Practically speaking, I know
most of you probably don't need or want Pascal, but it exists. And
suggesting FPC as an alternative is not an answer since it lacks
support for ISO 7185 (original, Wirth) or ISO 10206 (Extended). That's
the big reason to keep it around (obviously?), though I admit FPC is
much easier to build / bootstrap.
Don't take this all the wrong way, I'm trying to point you in the
> If you believe there is a need for a port of GPC, you are welcome
> to submit a PR to update the port to the current version and take
> over the responsibility for maintaining it.
How hard can it be to rebuild GCC 3.4.4?? Seriously, it can't be that
hard for you guys. I've (rarely) even rebuilt DJGPP on Windows, and
surely it's 1000x easier on *nix!!
More information about the freebsd-ports