🚀 go-pugleaf

Gene Buckle <geneb@grumble.deltasoft.com> wrote:
> I've scrubbed the system of any "default" Indy installs and the Delphi
> tests I run show the version I expect after building it according to
> the instructions on the website.
> 
> However, there are none of the .hpp files for the Indy components in the system
> anywhere.  How do I go about getting the system to create them?
> 
> Is there documentation anywhere on the use of the full*.bat files and the
> other tools in the Builder directory?
> 
> tnx all.
> 

Ok, I thrashed around the net and found a the famed "fullc10.bat" file and
I've got the header files generated for *120.

Note to those in my shoes - you'll need to update the computil.dpr program
by adding SetupC10 in a couple of places as well as making sure you add
the registry key (towards the end of the program) so that the environment
can be set up correctly to find the tool chain.

You'll also need to change any reference to "100" to "120" if you're 
actually using RAD Studio 2007 to grab the "right" version for that compiler.

What I want to know is why the hell isn't AtoZed not supporting the software
that's included with a commercial product?  I had to fall across by accident
a post about a guy that figured it out.  The supposed "daily snapshot" 
should have at a _minimum_ a pointer where to go to learn what the hell is 
going on.  Instead, we get terse and unhelpful documentation and a FAQ that
is about as useful for actually building the product as is a kaleidescope
to a blind person.  Way to go CodeGear and AtoZed!  

Maybe Embarcadero can clean this mess up, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

(and there's no way I'm renewing my SA until I see evidence(sp) that crap
like this has been taken care of)

g.

-- 
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.

"Gene Buckle" <geneb@grumble.deltasoft.com> wrote in message 
news:48460ae4@newsgroups.borland.com...

> What I want to know is why the hell isn't AtoZed not supporting
> the software that's included with a commercial product?

Because AToZed is not the developer of Indy to begin with.


Gambit 

"Remy Lebeau \(TeamB\)" <no.spam@no.spam.com> wrote:
> 
> "Gene Buckle" <geneb@grumble.deltasoft.com> wrote in message 
> news:48460ae4@newsgroups.borland.com...
> 
>> What I want to know is why the hell isn't AtoZed not supporting
>> the software that's included with a commercial product?
> 
> Because AToZed is not the developer of Indy to begin with.
> 
So who is it? Nevrona?  Is there _anyone_ capable of taking 
responsibility for the utter mess this thing is?

I could understand if this was some project like the JCL where it's not
included as part of the distribution.  However, if I'm going to pay
real $ for a product it had better damn well be supported properly.

I'm really not picking on you specifically Gambit, you just happen to be
close to the output vent. :)

g.

-- 
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.

"Gene Buckle" <geneb@grumble.deltasoft.com> wrote in message 
news:4846ec94@newsgroups.borland.com...

> So who is it? Nevrona?

No.  Indy is an open-source project maintained by volunteers.  AToZed is 
just a sponsor, not the actual developer.  The founder of Indy, Chad Hower, 
is affiliated with AToZed, but he hasn't been active in Indy's development 
for some time now.

> Is there _anyone_ capable of taking responsibility for
> the utter mess this thing is?

Believe me, we are well aware of Indy's shortcomings when it comes to 
installation.  Indy's development team simply doesn't have the time or 
manpower to fix it right now.


Gambit

>> Is there _anyone_ capable of taking responsibility for
>> the utter mess this thing is?
> 
> Believe me, we are well aware of Indy's shortcomings when it comes to 
> installation.  Indy's development team simply doesn't have the time or 
> manpower to fix it right now.
> 
> 
Thanks Gambit, your patience with my ranting is hugely appriciated. :)

g.

-- 
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.

Hi Remy,

I just wanted to comment on Gene's questions regarding Indy updates and 
the need for an installation procedure.  If you could somehow poll the 
users of this forum, I'm pretty sure you would find that we would be 
hugely appreciative if you could apply just a little of the time you are 
devoting to answering questions and updating Indy to writing an 
update/installation procedure. Wouldn't that ultimately result in a time 
savings for you?

Joe


Gene Buckle wrote:
>>> Is there _anyone_ capable of taking responsibility for
>>> the utter mess this thing is?
>> Believe me, we are well aware of Indy's shortcomings when it comes to 
>> installation.  Indy's development team simply doesn't have the time or 
>> manpower to fix it right now.
>>
>>
> Thanks Gambit, your patience with my ranting is hugely appriciated. :)
> 
> g.
> 

"Joe Pasquariello" <joep@fenway.com> wrote in message 
news:4849a440$1@newsgroups.borland.com...

> If you could somehow poll the users of this forum, I'm pretty sure
> you would find that we would be hugely appreciative if you could
> apply just a little of the time you are devoting to answering questions
> and updating Indy to writing an update/installation procedure.

I'm not able to do that right now.  I don't have any time lately to get on 
my computer at home, where I have Indy.  I've been accessing the newsgroups 
at work lately during my spare moments.  I have not been able to work on 
Indy at all in several weeks now, and I don't know when I will be able to do 
so again in the near future.


Gambit