nigtly builds update

[Pete]

FYI,

The nightly builds in sourceforge have not yet updated with the latest commits.

Last update was on 17-10-2022.

regards,

Pete

[Pete]

Well, seems that updates of the above nightly builds, at sourceforge, is permanently paused/stopped (?) ;-(

So, in case anyone needs latest MinGW build(s), can download them from Github.

(currently available  32-bit binaries, --64-bit package planned in the near future also--,  any feedback welcome).

regards,

Pete

[Francesco Perillo]

I will check this evening

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Harbour Users" group.
Unsubscribe: harbour-user...@googlegroups.com
Web: https://groups.google.com/group/harbour-users
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Harbour Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to harbour-user...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/3eb36082-961b-4ac7-bc55-e700369a0845n%40googlegroups.com.

[Matteo Baccan]

Hi

why not create a github action to create a new build for every commit on the repository?

At the moment I have not see any rebuild action

ciao

matteo

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/CADPHLr87fVRJYMOGcA8DdWf-sPgZhKwg_TXBZ4t2m8ZeZEBsEw%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Matteo Baccan
http://www.baccan.it

[Angel Pais]

Because the repository is locked out by people not longer interested in harbour anymore.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/CAP-o%2BFjxRt41YECBmxN_L%3D8mDyT%2BpprxUSr5ygdjnuHkvMzKSA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Matteo Baccan]

Hi

I don't understand the problem

The original harbour code is maintained?

If is maintained you can create a clone that only rebuilds and release the core with GitHub actions.

It's not important if the original is locked, it's only important if is public

ciao

matteo

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/CADZi2kLJiP%3DR7F49PAgUmGc-wN9Nxyn0%3DtBE7gkBB04qxvC0YA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ash]

Hello Pete,

Thank you for building the nightly Harbour. 

As I need to build some additional libraries, where can I download the comp folder contents from?

Regards,

Ash

[Pete]

Hello Ash,

I guess that by "comp folder contents", you mean the MinGW distro I've used to build latest Harbour version. 

If so, this is the link to download it: https://github.com/niXman/mingw-builds-binaries/releases/download/12.1.0-rt_v10-rev3/i686-12.1.0-release-posix-sjlj-rt_v10-rev3.7z

regards,

Pete

[Ash]

Hello Pete,

Thank you so much.

Regards,

Ash

[Ash]

Hello Pete,

Would you please update your Harbour build? I am certain a lot of Harbour users would be grateful.

Regards,

Ash

[pete....@gmail.com]

Good morning Ash,

On Monday, 22 May 2023 at 04:56:35 UTC+3 Ash wrote:

Would you please update your Harbour build? I am certain a lot of Harbour users would be grateful.

Yes! I was planning to do it soon. Btw, I was thinking to make some tests with newer MinGW versions

(12.3 and 13.1), (don't know whether this,  per se, could have any _real_ difference/benefit for the generated 

harbour binaries, regarding efficiency, speed or whatever; any opinion on that matter, welcome).

Anyway, I'll message here, when it'll be ready.

regards,

Pete

[gfil...@gmail.com]

Hello Pete,

> any opinion on that matter, welcome

In the attached file you will find Harbor speed tests for some 64-bit C compilers for my home environment.

Hope that useful.

Regards,

Grigory

понедельник, 22 мая 2023 г. в 08:11:09 UTC+2, pete....@gmail.com:

[pete....@gmail.com]

Good morning Grigory,

Thanks for the tests!

Well, it seems MinGW is the "winner" over VC++ and Embarcadero C++,

and that's interesting. Don't remember when and where (probably at stackoverflow)

I had seen a thread where some developers were claiming that Visual C++

was/is faster than MinGW but maybe the argument was about speed of compilation

rather than runtime speed of compiled code.

Anyway, since harbour's preferred (and officially supported) compiler, at least for windows platform,

is MinGW it'd be useful, for anybody here who we makes use of it,  to know how the various versions

of MinGW compiler alone, affects the generation of harbour's binaries and consequently

the compiled applications. If I'm not mistaken, you maintain mingw builds for minigui ;-)

so if your time permits, would be nice to do also some tests with different MinGW versions.

regards,

Pete

[pete....@gmail.com]

On Monday, 22 May 2023 at 04:56:35 UTC+3 Ash wrote:

Would you please update your Harbour build? I am certain a lot of Harbour users would be grateful.

Done! 

https://github.com/Petewg/harbour-core/blob/master/pkg/Harbour%203.2.0dev%20(r2305191429).7z

regards,

Pete

[Grigory Filatov]

Hello Pete,

I sent the Harbour speed report for your Harbour package in my environment.

The result is worse than my Harbour package for the same MinGW C 13.1 (your 32-bit vs my 64-bit).

HTH,

Grigory

ср, 24 мая 2023 г. в 15:02, pete....@gmail.com <pete....@gmail.com>:

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Harbour Users" group.
Unsubscribe: harbour-user...@googlegroups.com
Web: https://groups.google.com/group/harbour-users
---

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Harbour Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/harbour-users/INKBYSN3DEE/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to harbour-user...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/db27f675-9b8c-4224-8131-1d521ddd1629n%40googlegroups.com.

[pete....@gmail.com]

Hello Grigory,

On Wednesday, 24 May 2023 at 17:08:09 UTC+3 gfil...@gmail.com wrote:

I sent the Harbour speed report for your Harbour package in my environment.

The result is worse than my Harbour package for the same MinGW C 13.1 (your 32-bit vs my 64-bit).

Well, although the "worse" score for 32-bit is a predictable result, I think also it's quite reasonable.

If we take into account the double sized bitness and the additional computing power it brings

to the 64-bits architecture, I'd say that the score of 32-bit version is better than expected!

The average difference of ~15% lower speed for 32bits,  is not bad and probably explains

why 32bits architecture is still here "alive and (more or less) well", several years after the 64bits

have entered the computing arena.

Thank you very much, for your effort in doing the tests!

regards,

Pete