Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #81038 > unrolled thread

Pascal - and DEBIAN

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  Pascal - and DEBIAN c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-01-12 23:27 -0500
    Re: Pascal - and DEBIAN Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-01-13 09:03 +0000
      Re: Pascal - and DEBIAN "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-01-13 11:28 +0100
        Re: Pascal - and DEBIAN c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-01-13 12:55 -0500
          Re: Pascal - and DEBIAN rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-01-13 19:10 +0000
      Re: Pascal - and DEBIAN c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-01-13 12:52 -0500
        Re: Pascal - and DEBIAN rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-01-13 19:24 +0000
          Re: Pascal - and DEBIAN c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-01-13 15:23 -0500
          Re: Pascal - and DEBIAN Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-01-14 07:46 -0500
        Re: Pascal - and DEBIAN Jason H <jason_hindle@yahoo.com> - 2026-01-15 22:38 +0000
          Re: Pascal - and DEBIAN c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-01-15 19:09 -0500

#81038 — Pascal - and DEBIAN

Noted that the Deb libs are still using VERY
old versions of FPC/Lazarus - Laz 2.2

The current version of Lazarus is 4.4, FPC
around 3.3 or so.

Had to get the CURRENT Lazarus/FPC stuff
directly from the Laz site. Previous ver
didn't work, they got some version stuff
wrong. The latest though WORKS.

Is this 'Pascal Prejudice', or just laziness ?
Would we tolerate 'C' versions several years
old ?

Note, if installing, there's an ORDER ... FPC
and its source FIRST - THEN Laz.

Laz is STILL the best way to get a nice usable
GUI app in a big hurry. Nothing beats it. Full
gen-3 GUI development, fine fine details about
the look and feel are easy. Just drag and drop
and scale ... then set up to 50 little IF/THEN
params for each field.

Yea, yea, some of you HATE Pascal ...

But DO try Laz ... see a good alt.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#81059

c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
> Noted that the Deb libs are still using VERY
> old versions of FPC/Lazarus - Laz 2.2
>
> The current version of Lazarus is 4.4, FPC around 3.3 or so.

lazarus in Debian stable is 4.0 (with 4.4 in unstable). If you’re seeing
something older you’re not using current Debian.

https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=lazarus

> Had to get the CURRENT Lazarus/FPC stuff
> directly from the Laz site. Previous ver
> didn't work, they got some version stuff
> wrong. The latest though WORKS.
>
> Is this 'Pascal Prejudice', or just laziness ?

Debian is an unpaid volunteer project. If nobody who cares about a given
language volunteers their time, the outcome is poor or nonexistent
support for that language.

-- 
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81064

On 2026-01-13 10:03, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
>> Noted that the Deb libs are still using VERY
>> old versions of FPC/Lazarus - Laz 2.2
>>
>> The current version of Lazarus is 4.4, FPC around 3.3 or so.
> 
> lazarus in Debian stable is 4.0 (with 4.4 in unstable). If you’re seeing
> something older you’re not using current Debian.
> 
> https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=lazarus
> 

cer@Telcontar:~> rpm -q lazarus
lazarus-4.4-lp156.77.11.x86_64
cer@Telcontar:~>

openSUSE Leap 15.6, which is generically ancient.

repo Development/Languages/Other

>> Had to get the CURRENT Lazarus/FPC stuff
>> directly from the Laz site. Previous ver
>> didn't work, they got some version stuff
>> wrong. The latest though WORKS.
>>
>> Is this 'Pascal Prejudice', or just laziness ?
> 
> Debian is an unpaid volunteer project. If nobody who cares about a given
> language volunteers their time, the outcome is poor or nonexistent
> support for that language.
> 


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81083

On 1/13/26 05:28, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2026-01-13 10:03, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
>>> Noted that the Deb libs are still using VERY
>>> old versions of FPC/Lazarus - Laz 2.2
>>>
>>> The current version of Lazarus is 4.4, FPC around 3.3 or so.
>>
>> lazarus in Debian stable is 4.0 (with 4.4 in unstable). If you’re seeing
>> something older you’re not using current Debian.
>>
>> https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=lazarus
>>
> 
> cer@Telcontar:~> rpm -q lazarus
> lazarus-4.4-lp156.77.11.x86_64
> cer@Telcontar:~>
> 
> openSUSE Leap 15.6, which is generically ancient.
> 
> repo Development/Languages/Other
   But I use a DebBuntu.

   Anyway, the latest ver DID install cleanly, just
   had to get it from the developers site.

>>> Had to get the CURRENT Lazarus/FPC stuff
>>> directly from the Laz site. Previous ver
>>> didn't work, they got some version stuff
>>> wrong. The latest though WORKS.
>>>
>>> Is this 'Pascal Prejudice', or just laziness ?
>>
>> Debian is an unpaid volunteer project. If nobody who cares about a given
>> language volunteers their time, the outcome is poor or nonexistent
>> support for that language.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81088

On Tue, 13 Jan 2026 12:55:40 -0500, c186282 wrote:

>    Anyway, the latest ver DID install cleanly, just had to get it from
>    the developers site.

I didn't do anything with it but Fedora 43 installed 4.4.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81081

On 1/13/26 04:03, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
>> Noted that the Deb libs are still using VERY
>> old versions of FPC/Lazarus - Laz 2.2
>>
>> The current version of Lazarus is 4.4, FPC around 3.3 or so.
> 
> lazarus in Debian stable is 4.0 (with 4.4 in unstable). If you’re seeing
> something older you’re not using current Debian.

   MX

> https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=lazarus
> 
>> Had to get the CURRENT Lazarus/FPC stuff
>> directly from the Laz site. Previous ver
>> didn't work, they got some version stuff
>> wrong. The latest though WORKS.
>>
>> Is this 'Pascal Prejudice', or just laziness ?
> 
> Debian is an unpaid volunteer project. If nobody who cares about a given
> language volunteers their time, the outcome is poor or nonexistent
> support for that language.

   Delphi still sells (for a LOT) ... so there clearly
   are people who care about Pascal.

   OK, it's Pascal++ at this point.

   They keep updating FORTRAN compilers, even COBOL
   compilers. I suspect anti-Wirthism !!!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81090

On Tue, 13 Jan 2026 12:52:43 -0500, c186282 wrote:

>    OK, it's Pascal++ at this point.

It's been hanging out with C++ Builder too long.

>    They keep updating FORTRAN compilers, even COBOL compilers. I suspect
>    anti-Wirthism !!!

Wirth was a prolific author of languages nobody really liked. His last 
shot, Oberon, isn't even in the top 100 at Tiobe. Delphi was made useful 
enough to make it to 9.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81095

On 1/13/26 14:24, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2026 12:52:43 -0500, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     OK, it's Pascal++ at this point.
> 
> It's been hanging out with C++ Builder too long.
> 
>>     They keep updating FORTRAN compilers, even COBOL compilers. I suspect
>>     anti-Wirthism !!!
> 
> Wirth was a prolific author of languages nobody really liked. His last
> shot, Oberon, isn't even in the top 100 at Tiobe. Delphi was made useful
> enough to make it to 9.

   Oh geez ... I'd forgotten Oberon !

   An interesting idea, but nobody was very happy
   with the implementation.

   There's still some stuff on :
   https://projectoberon.net/

   Hmm, I can find that, but why can't I find a
   decent Modula-3 compiler that works ?  :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81113

rbowman wrote this post by blinking in Morse code:

> On Tue, 13 Jan 2026 12:52:43 -0500, c186282 wrote:
>
>>    OK, it's Pascal++ at this point.
>
> It's been hanging out with C++ Builder too long.
>
>>    They keep updating FORTRAN compilers, even COBOL compilers. I suspect
>>    anti-Wirthism !!!
>
> Wirth was a prolific author of languages nobody really liked. His last 
> shot, Oberon, isn't even in the top 100 at Tiobe. Delphi was made useful 
> enough to make it to 9.

I guess the languages weren't wirth it.

"It's been hanging out with C++ Builder too long."

Builder has a lot of Delphi in it (well, back before the year 2000
anyway). Bleh.

-- 
On Thanksgiving Day all over America, families sit down to dinner at the
same moment -- halftime.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81175

On 13/01/2026 17:52, c186282 wrote:
>On 1/13/26 04:03, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
>>> Noted that the Deb libs are still using VERY
>>> old versions of FPC/Lazarus - Laz 2.2
>>>
>>> The current version of Lazarus is 4.4, FPC around 3.3 or so.
>> 
>> lazarus in Debian stable is 4.0 (with 4.4 in unstable). If you’re seeing
>> something older you’re not using current Debian.
>
>   MX
>
>> https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=lazarus
>> 
>>> Had to get the CURRENT Lazarus/FPC stuff
>>> directly from the Laz site. Previous ver
>>> didn't work, they got some version stuff
>>> wrong. The latest though WORKS.
>>>
>>> Is this 'Pascal Prejudice', or just laziness ?
>> 
>> Debian is an unpaid volunteer project. If nobody who cares about a given
>> language volunteers their time, the outcome is poor or nonexistent
>> support for that language.
>
>   Delphi still sells (for a LOT) ... so there clearly
>   are people who care about Pascal.
>
>   OK, it's Pascal++ at this point.
>
>   They keep updating FORTRAN compilers, even COBOL
>   compilers. I suspect anti-Wirthism !!!
>

Delphi was born around the time people started connecting Windows
 applications to remote databases via OCBC. There will be bespoke
 applications written in the mid 90s that are still viable being maintained
 to this day.

-- 
--
A PICKER OF UNCONSIDERED TRIFLES

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81177

On 1/15/26 17:38, Jason H wrote:
> On 13/01/2026 17:52, c186282 wrote:
>> On 1/13/26 04:03, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
>>>> Noted that the Deb libs are still using VERY
>>>> old versions of FPC/Lazarus - Laz 2.2
>>>>
>>>> The current version of Lazarus is 4.4, FPC around 3.3 or so.
>>>
>>> lazarus in Debian stable is 4.0 (with 4.4 in unstable). If you’re seeing
>>> something older you’re not using current Debian.
>>
>>   MX
>>
>>> https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=lazarus
>>>
>>>> Had to get the CURRENT Lazarus/FPC stuff
>>>> directly from the Laz site. Previous ver
>>>> didn't work, they got some version stuff
>>>> wrong. The latest though WORKS.
>>>>
>>>> Is this 'Pascal Prejudice', or just laziness ?
>>>
>>> Debian is an unpaid volunteer project. If nobody who cares about a given
>>> language volunteers their time, the outcome is poor or nonexistent
>>> support for that language.
>>
>>   Delphi still sells (for a LOT) ... so there clearly
>>   are people who care about Pascal.
>>
>>   OK, it's Pascal++ at this point.
>>
>>   They keep updating FORTRAN compilers, even COBOL
>>   compilers. I suspect anti-Wirthism !!!
>>
> 
> Delphi was born around the time people started connecting Windows
> applications to remote databases via OCBC. There will be bespoke
> applications written in the mid 90s that are still viable being maintained
> to this day.

   No doubt.

   Delphi has object Pascal going for it, but it
   also has a great WYSIWYG form builder with a
   mass of fine-tuning and IQ-adding options. If
   you need a GUI like TODAY, Delphi (Laz/FPC) is
   your first stop. Still use it, still like it.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web