Install problems ZEOS(294) --> Lazarus 0.9.23

Forum related to version 6.5.1 (alpha) and 6.6.x (beta) of ZeosLib's DBOs

Moderators: gto, cipto_kh, EgonHugeist

Post Reply
lordmiro
Fresh Boarder
Fresh Boarder
Posts: 2
Joined: 16.08.2006, 14:48

Install problems ZEOS(294) --> Lazarus 0.9.23

Post by lordmiro »

Hi

Zeos can't compile with latest Lazarus version

ERROR in -------->
procedure TZAbstractRODataset.CheckFieldCompatibility(Field: TField;FieldDef: TFieldDef);

C:\lazarus\MYCOMP\ZEOS\src\component\ZAbstractRODataset.pas(3022,46) Fatal: Syntax error, "," expected but ")" found

C:\lazarus\MYCOMP\ZEOS\src\component\ZAbstractRODataset.pas(3045,18) Error: Identifier not found "CheckTypeSizes"

Is this Lazarus (latest FPC) or Zeos problem ?

Any help or suggestions appreciated.
I just comented everything inside TZAbstractRODataset,
but that is sure not right solution.


Thanks evreybody who works in Zeos team,
for GREAT work !

Regards Miran
User avatar
mdaems
Zeos Project Manager
Zeos Project Manager
Posts: 2766
Joined: 20.09.2005, 15:28
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Post by mdaems »

What FPC version are you using exactly? I suppose it's 2.2?
Just change {$IFDEF VER2_1} in procedure TZAbstractRODataset.CheckFieldCompatibility. Does that work?
That's the problem with all these versions... We'll have to find and implement a good DEFINES schema.

Mark
lordmiro
Fresh Boarder
Fresh Boarder
Posts: 2
Joined: 16.08.2006, 14:48

Post by lordmiro »

Thank you for your answer Mark !!

You are 100% right.

I use FPC 2.2.
I changed {$IFDEF VER2_1} to {$IFDEF VER2_2} in TZAbstractRODataset.CheckFieldCompatibility
and install ZEOS without problems.

Miran
User avatar
mdaems
Zeos Project Manager
Zeos Project Manager
Posts: 2766
Joined: 20.09.2005, 15:28
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Post by mdaems »

Bug report filed. (#65)
User avatar
mdaems
Zeos Project Manager
Zeos Project Manager
Posts: 2766
Joined: 20.09.2005, 15:28
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Post by mdaems »

Should be fixed in SVN Testing branch revision 296
Post Reply