I've acquired a few years old notebook which I thought I'd convert to a dual boot - W7 & Linux and then bung Lazarus on the Linux partition to have a play with.

I installed Linux Mint 17 but just can't get Lazarus installed. A major part of the problem is I don't know how to drive Linux. Before I try other distros anyone have a recommendation?

Roy Lambert

Roy,

<< I installed Linux Mint 17 but just can't get Lazarus installed. A major part of the problem is I don't know how to drive Linux. Before I try other distros anyone have a recommendation? >>

What specific part of the installation are you having trouble with ?

Linux really isn't that much different from modern Windows, at least from a file system layout perspective.  Things start to diverge when you starting dealing with configuration (registry vs. config files), services, and graphics (GDI/GDI+/Direct2D/3D, etc. vs. desktop window environment).

Here's a good rundown on the configuration files under Linux:

https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-config/index.html

Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

Tim

>What specific part of the installation are you having trouble with ?

Finding a Lazarus package that will a) install and b) have all the bits there. I tried Mint's Software Manager first - that doesn't seem to install FPC so I had a shuftie round the web and found a couple more, tried them and encountered other errors. Had a look on the Lazarus forums and tried a couple of the recommendations there - still no joy. My next move will be to set up some VMs on my "work" machine and try a few different Linux distributions, probably starting with Ububtu.

>Linux really isn't that much different from modern Windows, at least from a file system layout perspective. Things start to diverge when you starting dealing with configuration (registry vs. config files), services, and graphics (GDI/GDI+/Direct2D/3D, etc. vs. desktop window environment).
>
>Here's a good rundown on the configuration files under Linux:

Bookmarked to read later - thanks.


What always surprises me is that with the brilliant example of PICK how MS & the UXs could get it so wrong and come up with the registry.

Roy

On 1/27/2018 3:10 AM, Roy Lambert wrote:
>
> What always surprises me is that with the brilliant example of PICK how MS & the UXs could get it so wrong and come up with the registry.
>

Registry is in terms of engineering a great solution for the problem of
storing settings- generic key-value database with multi-user support,
security etc.

Us (developers) using it properly is where things often go wrong but i
can't really think of a better generic solution (note the term generic -
one can always find better simple solutions).

Raul

On 1/20/2018 11:13 AM, Roy Lambert wrote:
> I've acquired a few years old notebook which I thought I'd convert to a dual boot - W7 & Linux and then bung Lazarus on the Linux partition to have a play with.
> I installed Linux Mint 17 but just can't get Lazarus installed. A major part of the problem is I don't know how to drive Linux. Before I try other distros anyone have a recommendation?

Roy,

I'm far from being Linux expert but here are steps that worked for me
(there was a document i had found originally for this where i took steps).

Just tried it out on Mint 18 VM I have and it works fine - using FPC
3.0.4 , Lazarus 1.8

1. Install linux (mint) so you have a fully operational system , login
and run updates

in my case it's 64bit - if you're using 32 then adjust FPC and Lazarus
downloads accordingly below (the filenames)

Start terminal and do everything under home directory (cd ~) so it's
easier with paths and such.

Run each command one at a time.

2. update tools needed for build. Run following from terminal :
sudo apt-get install subversion make binutils gdb gcc libgtk2.0-dev

3. Download FPC:
BASEURL=ftp://ftpmaster.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/dist/3.0.4
wget $BASEURL/source/fpc-3.0.4.source.tar.gz
wget $BASEURL/x86_64-linux/fpc-3.0.4.x86_64-linux.tar

4. Unpack and Install FPC :
tar xvf fpc-3.0.4.x86_64-linux.tar
cd fpc-3.0.4.x86_64-linux
sudo ./install.sh

- I installed under /usr/local
- otherwise say Y(es) to everything

5. Back to home dir and unpack sources
cd ~
tar xvzf fpc-3.0.4.source.tar.gz

6. Get lazarus from SVN
SVNURL=http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/lazarus
svn co $SVNURL//tags/lazarus_1_8_0/ lazarus


7. Make lazarus
cd lazarus
make bigide

8.install Lazarus
sudo make install


9. Run Lazarus and write your app
../lazarus

It should open "Configure Lazarus IDE" screen and point to the FPC
sources and auto pick /home/mintdev/fpc-3.0.4

press "Start IDE" and it should run


As i said it worked for me and i did a quick Hello world - hope Tim is
ok with me attaching an image


Raul

Raul


Thnaks I'll have  ago with that as soon as I sort out my AV & AM (anti-malware) - MBAM is eating CPU and hammering disk for no reason I can see

Roy Lambert

Raul


>Registry is in terms of engineering a great solution for the problem of
>storing settings- generic key-value database with multi-user support,
>security etc.
>
>Us (developers) using it properly is where things often go wrong but i
>can't really think of a better generic solution (note the term generic -
>one can always find better simple solutions).

You have lit the blue touchpaper - please stand back

I have to disagree with you on both counts. I'm old enough to remember why the registry was invented, and your first comment would be true if those were the problems it set out to resolve. As I remember it came into existence primarily to solve multiple ini files causing IRQ conflicts. It was also touted as a centralised store for developers to keep program settings, not as a general dumping ground which it has become, and there is no mechanism to prevent any rubbish any programmer wishes to go into there from being dumped.

Registry corruption/overloading is the reason why Windows has to be reinstalled, its(or used to be) the cause of Windows slowdowns. Its a great hiding place for virus /malware.

Blaming users (in your terms developers) of the registry for its misuse would be fine IF the registry was managed, but since anyone can stuff anything in there I think its the registry developers to blame.

Security is a bit of a joke - otherwise how would a virus be able to add an autorun entry? Windows, as far as I know, isn't a multi-user system. I'm happy to be corrected, multi tasking yes but not multi user.

Trying to create a single generic solution to a wide range of issues is very often a bad idea, Plonking data for multiple personalities/themes into a single container complicates things when not necessary.

OK rant off

Roy

Raul


Interesting example here. I sorted out the conflict between AVG & MBAM but in doing so I managed to replace almost all my desktop icons with the blank page. The only ones remaining were system icons and a couple of folders. Somehow HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\ShellIcons\29 had become corrupted - I have it set to get rid of the arrows.

Its not the registry's fault (but I think I'll blame it anyway) but its taken me around 3 hours of searching and trying different things (starting with deleting the shell icon cache and working up to more weird stuff)  to find the solution. The number of posts and the number of "problem not solved" posts are massive.

Right off to try your Mint ideas now.

Roy Lambert

On 1/28/2018 5:33 AM, Roy Lambert wrote:
> You have lit the blue touchpaper - please stand back



> I have to disagree with you on both counts. I'm old enough to remember why the registry was invented, and your first comment would be true if those were the problems it set out to resolve. As I remember it came into existence primarily to solve multiple ini files causing IRQ conflicts. It was also touted as a centralised store for developers to keep program settings, not as a general dumping ground which it has become, and there is no mechanism to prevent any rubbish any programmer wishes to go into there from being dumped.

I might not be old enough but i did network support in the 90s and from
personal experience registry did help - trying to deploy key business
apps to 1500 users automatically with INI files was a PITA.

Registry (and Active Directory) helped a lot as you could automate
things lot better - not ideal but step forward.

> Registry corruption/overloading is the reason why Windows has to be reinstalled, its(or used to be) the cause of Windows slowdowns. Its a great hiding place for virus /malware.

These are valid points but there have been other issues as well with OS
in general. In my view Vista was absolute dog. Win 7 was OK but Win 8,
and now Win 10 i think windows really has become stable and fast.

There is that whole big brother aspect but overall I'm OK with the MS
and Apple (I'm also big MacOS and iOS user) tracking me than
Google/Facebook/Ad networks etc.


> Blaming users (in your terms developers) of the registry for its misuse would be fine IF the registry was managed, but since anyone can stuff anything in there I think its the registry developers to blame.

I 50% blame developers and 50% MS - half the problem is simply while
that info was out there its enforcement was weak.

However there is lot of WTF stuff developers and their apps are doing in
registry (also on file system though so it's not unique to registry -
like putting files in win folders etc).


> Security is a bit of a joke - otherwise how would a virus be able to add an autorun entry? Windows, as far as I know, isn't a multi-user system. I'm happy to be corrected, multi tasking yes but not multi user.

Security is a whole other problem i agree - it's slowly getting better
but there is no 100% safe environment for general purpose OS.

I know our school districts are all requiring Chromebooks now and i
suspect the limited nature of that (and accompanying reduction in
support headaches) is actually a good

Windows can very much be a multi-user system. Even today I have
customers using Citrix and MS Terminal Services for running our app in
pure multi-user environment (i.e. 20-30 copies of the app running
simultaneously on same system and different virtual desktops).


> Trying to create a single generic solution to a wide range of issues is very often a bad idea, Plonking data for multiple personalities/themes into a single container complicates things when not necessary.

Yes but at OS level that's how MS has to approach it - all other options
are still available as well.

Again i think they have clamped down and it is lot better than it used
to be.

Raul

Raul


>I might not be old enough but i did network support in the 90s and from
>personal experience registry did help - trying to deploy key business
>apps to 1500 users automatically with INI files was a PITA.

Interesting. I never did that many but I don't remember it suddenly getting easier with a mixed bag of PCs.

>Registry (and Active Directory) helped a lot as you could automate
>things lot better - not ideal but step forward.

I agree that the automation helped a lot.

>> Registry corruption/overloading is the reason why Windows has to be reinstalled, its(or used to be) the cause of Windows slowdowns. Its a great hiding place for virus /malware.
>
>These are valid points but there have been other issues as well with OS
>in general. In my view Vista was absolute dog. Win 7 was OK but Win 8,
>and now Win 10 i think windows really has become stable and fast.

Never had much trouble with Vista, W7 is fine and because I know where things are I prefer it to W10 where I spend a long time hunting for things that user to be just THERE

>There is that whole big brother aspect but overall I'm OK with the MS
>and Apple (I'm also big MacOS and iOS user) tracking me than
>Google/Facebook/Ad networks etc.

That's fascinating. Ultimately, to make money from it, all of the firms tracking you will do the same thing with your data.

>
>> Blaming users (in your terms developers) of the registry for its misuse would be fine IF the registry was managed, but since anyone can stuff anything in there I think its the registry developers to blame.
>
>I 50% blame developers and 50% MS - half the problem is simply while
>that info was out there its enforcement was weak.
>
>However there is lot of WTF stuff developers and their apps are doing in
>registry (also on file system though so it's not unique to registry -
>like putting files in win folders etc).

I know what you mean but whilst I wouldn't blame a home owner for not fitting titanium shields across windows and doors I would blame them for leaving the front door open. Agreed that devs shouldn't do it but it was made so easy for them, and in some cases they were encouraged.

>
>> Security is a bit of a joke - otherwise how would a virus be able to add an autorun entry? Windows, as far as I know, isn't a multi-user system. I'm happy to be corrected, multi tasking yes but not multi user.
>
>Security is a whole other problem i agree - it's slowly getting better
>but there is no 100% safe environment for general purpose OS.

Agreed, but it could have been a lot lower a long while back.

>I know our school districts are all requiring Chromebooks now and i
>suspect the limited nature of that (and accompanying reduction in
>support headaches) is actually a good

Was that cost driven?

>Windows can very much be a multi-user system. Even today I have
>customers using Citrix and MS Terminal Services for running our app in
>pure multi-user environment (i.e. 20-30 copies of the app running
>simultaneously on same system and different virtual desktops).

Nope - I think you'll find that's Citrix that's multiuser. Never used Terminal Services but from a quick google

<<Remote Desktop Services, known as Terminal Services in Windows Server 2008 and earlier, is one of the components of Microsoft Windows that allows a user to take control of a remote computer or virtual machine over a network connection>>

Doesn't sound multiuser but since I've never used it I can't really say.

>> Trying to create a single generic solution to a wide range of issues is very often a bad idea, Plonking data for multiple personalities/themes into a single container complicates things when not necessary.
>
>Yes but at OS level that's how MS has to approach it - all other options
>are still available as well.

No it was how they decided to approach it. If by "other options" you mean ini files - I use them. Over the years the only thing I've stored in the registry (at least for s/w I've written) is which com port to use to dial a phone. Everything else is stored in a database table or ini file.

>Again i think they have clamped down and it is lot better than it used
>to be.

Things are changing and I'm optimistic enough to hope its for the better. Time will tell.

Roy