Menu
▾
▴
firebird-devel
|
From: Adriano d. S. F. <adr...@gm...> - 2022-08-24 11:45:27
|
Hi! This is our Firebird 4.0.2 released files: Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0-Win32-pdb.exe Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0-Win32-pdb.zip Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0-Win32.exe Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0-Win32.zip Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0-x64-pdb.exe Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0-x64-pdb.zip Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0-x64.exe Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0-x64.zip Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0.amd64.tar.gz Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0.arm.tar.gz Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0.arm64.tar.gz Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0.i686.tar.gz Firebird-4.0.2.2816-0.tar.xz Firebird-debuginfo-4.0.2.2816-0.amd64.tar.gz Firebird-debuginfo-4.0.2.2816-0.i686.tar.gz Firebird-withDebugInfo-4.0.2.2816-0.arm.tar.gz Firebird-withDebugInfo-4.0.2.2816-0.arm64.tar.gz (missing MacOS which would be: Firebird-4.0.2.2816-x86_64.pkg) It's difficult to understand, they do not mention OS and hardware architectures are inconsistent. I propose this name convention starting with Firebird 5: Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x86-pdb.exe Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x86-pdb.zip Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x86.exe Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x86.zip Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x64-pdb.exe Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x64-pdb.zip Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x64.exe Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x64.zip Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x64.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x64-debuginfo.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm.tar.gz (armv7, other?) Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm-debuginfo.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm64.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm64-debuginfo.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x86.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x86-debuginfo.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-source.tar.xz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-macos-x64.pkg Adriano |
|
From: Mark R. <ma...@la...> - 2022-08-24 11:59:36
|
On 24-08-2022 13:45, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: > This is our Firebird 4.0.2 released files: > [..] > It's difficult to understand, they do not mention OS and hardware > architectures are inconsistent. > > I propose this name convention starting with Firebird 5: [..] > Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x64.tar.gz > Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x64-debuginfo.tar.gz > Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm.tar.gz (armv7, other?) > Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm-debuginfo.tar.gz > Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm64.tar.gz > Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm64-debuginfo.tar.gz [..] In general I'm OK with this, but currently our download page claims the ARM32 and ARM64 build are for Android, and not generically Linux. So, are they actually generically Linux, or specifically for Android? Mark -- Mark Rotteveel |
|
From: Adriano d. S. F. <adr...@gm...> - 2022-08-24 12:04:14
|
On 24/08/2022 08:59, Mark Rotteveel wrote: > On 24-08-2022 13:45, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: >> This is our Firebird 4.0.2 released files: >> > [..] >> It's difficult to understand, they do not mention OS and hardware >> architectures are inconsistent. >> >> I propose this name convention starting with Firebird 5: > [..] >> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x64.tar.gz >> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x64-debuginfo.tar.gz >> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm.tar.gz (armv7, other?) >> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm-debuginfo.tar.gz >> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm64.tar.gz >> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm64-debuginfo.tar.gz > [..] > > In general I'm OK with this, but currently our download page claims the > ARM32 and ARM64 build are for Android, and not generically Linux. > > So, are they actually generically Linux, or specifically for Android? > You might be correct. Alex can certainly explain better. I'm also not sure about arm64 vs aarch64 differences. Here https://github.com/asfernandes/firebird/releases/tag/v4.0.0-aarch64-asfernandes I built a Linux RaspBerry pi and named aarch64 but never published it as official. Adriano |
|
From: Jiří Č. <ji...@ci...> - 2022-08-24 12:35:34
|
I would unify the `pdb`, `debuginfo`, etc. into simple `debug` suffix. Probably Alex can clarify, but it really the ARM32/64 for Linux? And if so, do we even need ARM32? -- Mgr. Jiří Činčura https://www.tabsoverspaces.com/ |
|
From: Dmitry Y. <fir...@ya...> - 2022-08-24 12:48:05
|
24.08.2022 15:35, Jiří Činčura wrote: > I would unify the `pdb`, `debuginfo`, etc. into simple `debug` suffix. Agreed. Dmitry |
|
From: Dimitry S. <sd...@ib...> - 2022-08-24 12:51:21
|
Dmitry Yemanov wrote 24.08.2022 14:47: >> I would unify the `pdb`, `debuginfo`, etc. into simple `debug` suffix. > > Agreed. And better to keep "debuginfo" verb, IMHO to prevent confusion after expectation to find "a debug build" in "debug" package. -- WBR, SD. |
|
From: Alex P. <pes...@ma...> - 2022-08-24 13:24:49
|
On 8/24/22 15:03, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: > On 24/08/2022 08:59, Mark Rotteveel wrote: >> On 24-08-2022 13:45, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: >>> This is our Firebird 4.0.2 released files: >>> >> [..] >>> It's difficult to understand, they do not mention OS and hardware >>> architectures are inconsistent. >>> >>> I propose this name convention starting with Firebird 5: >> [..] >>> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x64.tar.gz >>> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x64-debuginfo.tar.gz >>> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm.tar.gz (armv7, other?) >>> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm-debuginfo.tar.gz >>> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm64.tar.gz >>> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm64-debuginfo.tar.gz >> [..] >> >> In general I'm OK with this, but currently our download page claims the >> ARM32 and ARM64 build are for Android, and not generically Linux. >> >> So, are they actually generically Linux, or specifically for Android? >> > You might be correct. > > Alex can certainly explain better. Specifically for Android. I suppose this to be reflected in the name cause it's quite possible that we will provide arm64 builds for generic linux. > I'm also not sure about arm64 vs aarch64 differences. That's "serious" difference - exactly like between amd64, x86_64 and x64 :) |
|
From: Adriano d. S. F. <adr...@gm...> - 2022-08-25 00:59:23
|
On 24/08/2022 09:32, Alex Peshkoff via Firebird-devel wrote: > On 8/24/22 15:03, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: >> On 24/08/2022 08:59, Mark Rotteveel wrote: >>> On 24-08-2022 13:45, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: >>>> This is our Firebird 4.0.2 released files: >>>> >>> [..] >>>> It's difficult to understand, they do not mention OS and hardware >>>> architectures are inconsistent. >>>> >>>> I propose this name convention starting with Firebird 5: >>> [..] >>>> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x64.tar.gz >>>> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x64-debuginfo.tar.gz >>>> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm.tar.gz (armv7, other?) >>>> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm-debuginfo.tar.gz >>>> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm64.tar.gz >>>> Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-arm64-debuginfo.tar.gz >>> [..] >>> >>> In general I'm OK with this, but currently our download page claims the >>> ARM32 and ARM64 build are for Android, and not generically Linux. >>> >>> So, are they actually generically Linux, or specifically for Android? >>> >> You might be correct. >> >> Alex can certainly explain better. > > Specifically for Android. I suppose this to be reflected in the name > cause it's quite possible that we will provide arm64 builds for generic > linux. > What about our android arm for 32 bits? Should we name it arm, arm32, armv7, armv7l, other? Adriano |
|
From: Mark R. <ma...@la...> - 2022-08-24 13:32:43
|
On 24-08-2022 14:50, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > Dmitry Yemanov wrote 24.08.2022 14:47: >>> I would unify the `pdb`, `debuginfo`, etc. into simple `debug` suffix. >> >> Agreed. > > And better to keep "debuginfo" verb, IMHO to prevent confusion after > expectation to find "a debug build" in "debug" package. What confusion, debuginfo packages are already listed as a "Debug build" on the download page. If the term is confusing or ambiguous, it already is so in its current form. In other words, consolidating it under the term "debug" shouldn't be a problem. Mark -- Mark Rotteveel |
|
From: Dimitry S. <sd...@ib...> - 2022-08-24 13:36:20
|
Mark Rotteveel wrote 24.08.2022 15:32: > If the term is confusing or ambiguous, it already is so in its current form. Yes, it is. That's why I would suggest to change that. -- WBR, SD. |
|
From: Mark R. <ma...@la...> - 2022-08-24 14:04:38
|
On 24-08-2022 15:36, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > Mark Rotteveel wrote 24.08.2022 15:32: >> If the term is confusing or ambiguous, it already is so in its current >> form. > > Yes, it is. That's why I would suggest to change that. The Windows pdb packages are complete builds though. So maybe those should be "debug", while the Linux builds should be "debug-symbols" or something like that. Mark -- Mark Rotteveel |
|
From: Alex P. <pes...@ma...> - 2022-08-24 14:06:55
|
On 8/24/22 17:04, Mark Rotteveel wrote: > On 24-08-2022 15:36, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: >> Mark Rotteveel wrote 24.08.2022 15:32: >>> If the term is confusing or ambiguous, it already is so in its >>> current form. >> >> Yes, it is. That's why I would suggest to change that. > > The Windows pdb packages are complete builds though. Same for linux - not stripped binaries provided. > So maybe those should be "debug", while the Linux builds should be > "debug-symbols" or something like that. > > Mark |
|
From: Dimitry S. <sd...@ib...> - 2022-08-24 14:10:31
|
Alex Peshkoff via Firebird-devel wrote 24.08.2022 16:06: > Same for linux - not stripped binaries provided. Nope. Firebird-debuginfo-4.0.2.2816-0.amd64.tar.gz contains only extracted debug symbols, not binaries. -- WBR, SD. |
|
From: Mark R. <ma...@la...> - 2022-08-24 14:14:59
|
On 24-08-2022 16:06, Alex Peshkoff via Firebird-devel wrote: > On 8/24/22 17:04, Mark Rotteveel wrote: >> On 24-08-2022 15:36, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: >>> Mark Rotteveel wrote 24.08.2022 15:32: >>>> If the term is confusing or ambiguous, it already is so in its >>>> current form. >>> >>> Yes, it is. That's why I would suggest to change that. >> >> The Windows pdb packages are complete builds though. > > Same for linux - not stripped binaries provided. The Linux builds are not complete builds compared to Windows pdb builds (e.g. config files, documentation, security database, etc are missing) Mark -- Mark Rotteveel |
|
From: Alex P. <pes...@ma...> - 2022-08-24 15:01:12
|
On 8/24/22 17:10, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > Alex Peshkoff via Firebird-devel wrote 24.08.2022 16:06: >> Same for linux - not stripped binaries provided. > > Nope. Firebird-debuginfo-4.0.2.2816-0.amd64.tar.gz contains only > extracted debug symbols, not binaries. > Sorry, but they are created by 'cp' command ;) One can run them directly. |
|
From: Dimitry S. <sd...@ib...> - 2022-08-24 15:33:20
|
Alex Peshkoff via Firebird-devel wrote 24.08.2022 17:00: > Sorry, but they are created by 'cp' command ;) One can run them directly. Wow. That's crazy. -- WBR, SD. |
|
From: Alex P. <pes...@ma...> - 2022-08-24 15:04:55
|
On 8/24/22 17:14, Mark Rotteveel wrote: > On 24-08-2022 16:06, Alex Peshkoff via Firebird-devel wrote: >> On 8/24/22 17:04, Mark Rotteveel wrote: >>> On 24-08-2022 15:36, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: >>>> Mark Rotteveel wrote 24.08.2022 15:32: >>>>> If the term is confusing or ambiguous, it already is so in its >>>>> current form. >>>> >>>> Yes, it is. That's why I would suggest to change that. >>> >>> The Windows pdb packages are complete builds though. >> >> Same for linux - not stripped binaries provided. > > The Linux builds are not complete builds compared to Windows pdb > builds (e.g. config files, documentation, security database, etc are > missing) > Yep, they contain only binaries with debug-info. |
|
From: Adriano d. S. F. <adr...@gm...> - 2022-08-25 00:34:40
|
On 24/08/2022 12:04, Alex Peshkoff via Firebird-devel wrote: >> >> The Linux builds are not complete builds compared to Windows pdb >> builds (e.g. config files, documentation, security database, etc are >> missing) >> > > Yep, they contain only binaries with debug-info. > Linux "debuginfo" packages contains only the debug symbols. Different than Android "withDebugInfo" packages, that have full package with debug symbols embedded in the executables/libraries. Adriano |
|
From: Mark R. <ma...@la...> - 2022-08-24 15:06:35
|
On 24-08-2022 17:00, Alex Peshkoff via Firebird-devel wrote: > On 8/24/22 17:10, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: >> Alex Peshkoff via Firebird-devel wrote 24.08.2022 16:06: >>> Same for linux - not stripped binaries provided. >> >> Nope. Firebird-debuginfo-4.0.2.2816-0.amd64.tar.gz contains only >> extracted debug symbols, not binaries. >> > > Sorry, but they are created by 'cp' command ;) One can run them directly. Nonetheless, those Linux archives are not complete builds. Mark -- Mark Rotteveel |
|
From: Paul R. <pr...@ib...> - 2022-08-24 15:34:31
|
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 16:04:20 +0200 Mark Rotteveel <ma...@la...> wrote: > On 24-08-2022 15:36, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > > Mark Rotteveel wrote 24.08.2022 15:32: > >> If the term is confusing or ambiguous, it already is so in its current > >> form. > > > > Yes, it is. That's why I would suggest to change that. > > The Windows pdb packages are complete builds though. So maybe those > should be "debug", while the Linux builds should be "debug-symbols" or > something like that. The windows pdb packages contain complete builds partly because of the requirement that anything installable must be uninstallable. Just dropping a bunch of pdb's into the install dir will soone or later leave a mess behind it. More importantly, it is essential that the symbols exactly match the binaries, otherwise the debugger will complain and the whole exercise will be largely useless. Shipping a complete kit guarantees that everything will match up and can be uninstalled easily. But I agree with Dimitry - we should take care to distinguish kits containing debug symbols from actual 'Debug' builds. Paul -- Paul Reeves http://www.ibphoenix.com Supporting users of Firebird |
|
From: Adriano d. S. F. <adr...@gm...> - 2022-08-25 00:32:06
|
On 24/08/2022 12:33, Paul Reeves wrote: > On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 16:04:20 +0200 > Mark Rotteveel <ma...@la...> wrote: > >> On 24-08-2022 15:36, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: >>> Mark Rotteveel wrote 24.08.2022 15:32: >>>> If the term is confusing or ambiguous, it already is so in its current >>>> form. >>> >>> Yes, it is. That's why I would suggest to change that. >> >> The Windows pdb packages are complete builds though. So maybe those >> should be "debug", while the Linux builds should be "debug-symbols" or >> something like that. > > The windows pdb packages contain complete builds partly because of the > requirement that anything installable must be uninstallable. Just dropping > a bunch of pdb's into the install dir will soone or later leave a mess > behind it. > > More importantly, it is essential that the symbols exactly match the > binaries, otherwise the debugger will complain and the whole exercise will > be largely useless. Shipping a complete kit guarantees that everything will > match up and can be uninstalled easily. > > But I agree with Dimitry - we should take care to distinguish kits > containing debug symbols from actual 'Debug' builds. > But that leaves a question. Who installs the "debug" binaries? I expect people looking for this is people having a problem and wanting to understand a crash. Then they would need to overwrite their installation or install it in another place. This does not look as a good workflow. It would be easy to drop the debug symbols in their installed location. The install location already has modifiable files that is not uninstalled. If the debug symbols do not matches the executables it probably will not make much harm: - Someone put them there, updated installation and did not updated the debug symbols - Someone did a wrong job - Someone will not have a good experience with the debug - Someone will correct their poor job Adriano |
|
From: Jiří Č. <ji...@ci...> - 2022-08-24 16:33:17
|
How crazy idea it would be to have even Linux builds with binaries? -- Mgr. Jiří Činčura https://www.tabsoverspaces.com/ |
|
From: Alex P. <pes...@ma...> - 2022-08-24 17:01:28
|
On 8/24/22 19:33, Jiří Činčura wrote: > How crazy idea it would be to have even Linux builds with binaries? > May be I've lost context - but we release linux builds with binaries since the first days of the project. |
|
From: Jiří Č. <ji...@ci...> - 2022-08-24 17:58:12
|
>> How crazy idea it would be to have even Linux builds with binaries? >> > > May be I've lost context - but we release linux builds with binaries > since the first days of the project. Sorry. I meant debug(info) builds with binaries. -- Mgr. Jiří Činčura https://www.tabsoverspaces.com/ |
|
From: Adriano d. S. F. <adr...@gm...> - 2022-08-25 01:16:02
|
On 24/08/2022 08:45, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: > > I propose this name convention starting with Firebird 5: > Here is my updated proposal based on the discussion so far: Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x86-withDebugSymbols.exe Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x86-withDebugSymbols.zip Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x86.exe Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x86.zip Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x64-withDebugSymbols.exe Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x64-withDebugSymbols.zip Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x64.exe Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-windows-x64.zip Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x64.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x64-debugSymbols.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-android-arm.tar.gz (armv7, other?) Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-android-arm-withDebugSymbols.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-android-arm64.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-android-arm64-withDebugSymbols.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x86.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-linux-x86-debugSymbols.tar.gz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-source.tar.xz Firebird-5.0.0.2816-0-macos-x64.pkg Adriano |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X