Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
Hi, Przemysław Czerpak wrote: On Sat, 19 Dec 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: I'd like to ask everyone if there are any patches, commits or fixes pending? (besides hbqt related modules) 1. ... 6. I'm also working on small Christmas gift but I do not know if I find enough spare time to finish it so it's less important. this is the most itching part of your to do list :) Regards, Mindaugas ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
>> Pls hold these changes until after the release. >> GC API decisions will be made only after that. > > We already took such decision and committed modifications few weeks ago. > The new GC API introduced user defined mark functions what allows give > GC interface to non core code programmers. This modification also changed > the meaning of functions like hb_gcRefInc() and hb_gcRefFree(). Before > this modification they were declared as internal HVM functions because > they couldn't give anything for non core code programmers. They had > only one functionality in external code: they could be used to break > internal reference counters and cause GC crash. > Now we open the doors for non core programmers to use memory blocks > with cross references which can be automatically scanned and freed > by our GC but to make the new interface complete we should make above > functions public and I've just committed such modification few minutes > ago. > I really think that this should be done before final release because > it may be very important functionality for 3-rd party code programmers > so now they can use it updating their code for new Harbour 2.0 API. Okay. But now we have to patch / retest / clean hbcairo, so probably we will slip out of time. Hopefully not. Brgds, Viktor ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
On Mon, 21 Dec 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: Hi, > Pls hold these changes until after the release. > GC API decisions will be made only after that. We already took such decision and committed modifications few weeks ago. The new GC API introduced user defined mark functions what allows give GC interface to non core code programmers. This modification also changed the meaning of functions like hb_gcRefInc() and hb_gcRefFree(). Before this modification they were declared as internal HVM functions because they couldn't give anything for non core code programmers. They had only one functionality in external code: they could be used to break internal reference counters and cause GC crash. Now we open the doors for non core programmers to use memory blocks with cross references which can be automatically scanned and freed by our GC but to make the new interface complete we should make above functions public and I've just committed such modification few minutes ago. I really think that this should be done before final release because it may be very important functionality for 3-rd party code programmers so now they can use it updating their code for new Harbour 2.0 API. best regards, Przemek ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
Hi Mindaugas, Pls hold these changes until after the release. GC API decisions will be made only after that. Brgds, Viktor On 2009 Dec 21, at 23:14, Mindaugas Kavaliauskas wrote: > Viktor Szakáts wrote: >> Hi All, >> I'd like to ask everyone if there are any patches, commits or fixes pending? >> (besides hbqt related modules) > > Hi, > > > I have a some modifications in hbcairo, but it's unfinished because I'm > waiting for decision on GC API. > > > Regards, > Mindaugas > ___ > Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) > Harbour@harbour-project.org > http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
Viktor Szakáts wrote: Hi All, I'd like to ask everyone if there are any patches, commits or fixes pending? (besides hbqt related modules) Hi, I have a some modifications in hbcairo, but it's unfinished because I'm waiting for decision on GC API. Regards, Mindaugas ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
Hi April, On 2009 Dec 21, at 04:17, April White wrote: > Viktor Szakáts wrote: >> I'd like to ask everyone if there are any patches, commits or fixes pending? >> (besides hbqt related modules) >> > Viktor, I'd like to commit more changes to the hb_btree code. It is not 100% > done yet but this fixes some major bugs and paves the way for the next set of > changes. > > I can hold off on this if you recommend. No problem, please commit them. Brgds, Viktor ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
Viktor Szakáts wrote: I'd like to ask everyone if there are any patches, commits or fixes pending? (besides hbqt related modules) Viktor, I'd like to commit more changes to the hb_btree code. It is not 100% done yet but this fixes some major bugs and paves the way for the next set of changes. I can hold off on this if you recommend. April -- I was married by a judge. I should have asked for a jury. - Groucho Marx ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
On Mon, 21 Dec 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: Hi, > It stayed the same. C first, C++ second. Thank you very much. So small note for users not using in their .prg code MAIN() or _APPMAIN() functions as startup application entry. In MSVC Harbour builds when .prg modules were compiled in C and C++ modes then the 1-st function from the 1-st module compiled in C mode is used as startup function. INIT PROCEDUREs from modules compiled in C mode are executed before INIT PROCEDUREs from modules compiled in C++ - this maybe important for some 3-rd party library developers. best regards, Przemek ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
Hi Przemek, On 2009 Dec 20, at 17:17, Przemysław Czerpak wrote: > On Sat, 19 Dec 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: > > Hi, > >> I made a test for mixing C++ and C code, and it worked without >> problem with current build. C INIT/EXIT was executed first. > > Thank you. > BTW can you also check if C and C++ modules use the same initialization > order? I.e. you have three files with INIT procedures (P1(), P2(), P3()) It stayed the same. C first, C++ second. > linked as: > f1.obj f2.obj f3.obj > When all are compiled in C or C++ mode then they should be executed > in the link order: P1, P2, P3. > Please check the order for f1.obj(c++) f2.obj(c) f3.obj(c++) and p2_init p1_init p3_init p2_exit p1_exit p3_exit > f1.obj(c) f2.obj(c++) f3.obj(c) p1_init p3_init p2_init p1_exit p3_exit p2_exit Brgds, Viktor ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
Hi, I need a yes/no, since I have no capacity to make a decision here, and for me this stays a grey area, a quite big one actually. I remember your mails (even referred to it), but I specifically didn't want to go into this area before release. Brgds, Viktor On 2009 Dec 20, at 17:11, Przemysław Czerpak wrote: > On Sat, 19 Dec 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: > > Hi, > >>> I think /opt should be removed from HB_SYSLOC logic in global.mk >>> /opt is not a system dir >> It's fine with me and the modification is an easy one >> (and should also be done in hbmk2.prg), but before I >> do it, can other *nix experts give a short opinion or >> confirmation? > > It despneds on what you are calling system installation? > If you ask about special permissions necessary to access /opt > then it's system installation. > If you ask about using /opt/*/lib as one one default dynamic loader > libraries then it's not system installation but some installers > can add /opt/*/lib to dynamic loader library list. > If you ask about some strict directory structure used in /opt tree > which is defined by filesystem hierarchy standard then /opt is > described and should confirm such standards so in this sense it's > system installation. > >> To me /opt looks like a grey area. > > It's quite precisely defined by FHS (Filesystem Hierarchy Standard). > Few months ago I sent this list description of directory structure > which should be used by Harbour when it's installed in /opt directory. > > Below I'm attaching it again. > > best regards, > Przemek > > > '->' means soft link, > > 1. FHS2.3 compliant localization for add-on applications: > = > /opt/ >/harbour/ >/bin/ > >/lib/ > > [// > ] > [/// >] >/include/ > > [// >] >/share/ > /man/ > /man1/ > .1 > /doc/ > > [// > ] >/etc -> /etc/harbour > /etc/ >/harbour/ > > /etc/ >/opt/ (if exists) >/harbour -> /etc/harbour > > if /opt/bin exists then we should create in this directory soft links > to executable files in /opt/harbour/bin > > if /opt/lib exists then we should create in this directory soft links > to harbour shared libraries in /opt/harbour/lib > > if /opt/man/man1 exists then we should create in this directory soft links > to harbour shared libraries in /opt/harbour/share/man/man1 > ___ > Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) > Harbour@harbour-project.org > http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: Hi, > > I think /opt should be removed from HB_SYSLOC logic in global.mk > > /opt is not a system dir > It's fine with me and the modification is an easy one > (and should also be done in hbmk2.prg), but before I > do it, can other *nix experts give a short opinion or > confirmation? It despneds on what you are calling system installation? If you ask about special permissions necessary to access /opt then it's system installation. If you ask about using /opt/*/lib as one one default dynamic loader libraries then it's not system installation but some installers can add /opt/*/lib to dynamic loader library list. If you ask about some strict directory structure used in /opt tree which is defined by filesystem hierarchy standard then /opt is described and should confirm such standards so in this sense it's system installation. > To me /opt looks like a grey area. It's quite precisely defined by FHS (Filesystem Hierarchy Standard). Few months ago I sent this list description of directory structure which should be used by Harbour when it's installed in /opt directory. Below I'm attaching it again. best regards, Przemek '->' means soft link, 1. FHS2.3 compliant localization for add-on applications: = /opt/ /harbour/ /bin/ /lib/ [// ] [/// ] /include/ [// ] /share/ /man/ /man1/ .1 /doc/ [// ] /etc -> /etc/harbour /etc/ /harbour/ /etc/ /opt/ (if exists) /harbour -> /etc/harbour if /opt/bin exists then we should create in this directory soft links to executable files in /opt/harbour/bin if /opt/lib exists then we should create in this directory soft links to harbour shared libraries in /opt/harbour/lib if /opt/man/man1 exists then we should create in this directory soft links to harbour shared libraries in /opt/harbour/share/man/man1 ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: Hi, > I made a test for mixing C++ and C code, and it worked without > problem with current build. C INIT/EXIT was executed first. Thank you. BTW can you also check if C and C++ modules use the same initialization order? I.e. you have three files with INIT procedures (P1(), P2(), P3()) linked as: f1.obj f2.obj f3.obj When all are compiled in C or C++ mode then they should be executed in the link order: P1, P2, P3. Please check the order for f1.obj(c++) f2.obj(c) f3.obj(c++) and f1.obj(c) f2.obj(c++) f3.obj(c) best regards, Przemek ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
RE: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
(I've not read any other posts in this thread) I want to commit my btree fix to see if it clears the 64-bit warning. > From: harbour...@syenar.hu > Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 11:07:54 +0100 > To: harbour@harbour-project.org > Subject: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending? > > Hi All, > > I'd like to ask everyone if there are any > patches, commits or fixes pending? (besides > hbqt related modules) > > Brgds, > Viktor > > ___ > Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) > Harbour@harbour-project.org > http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
Hi, On 2009 Dec 19, at 12:33, Przemysław Czerpak wrote: > On Sat, 19 Dec 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: > > Hi All, > >> I'd like to ask everyone if there are any >> patches, commits or fixes pending? (besides >> hbqt related modules) > > 1. I'm making some experiments with DXE support in DJGPP builds. > DXE is sth like DLL for DJGPP. Tomorrow I should finish it. > > 2. I'll commit ASAP some modifications for DOS DJGPP and OpenWatcom > builds which will enable or disable default DLL support for them > depending on results of my current tests. If I do not find enough > time to finish them then I'll simply disable DLLs in DOS builds > as temporary solution. > > 3. I will want to commit modifications for .prg HB_TRACE() interface > ASAP. If possible I'll commit it tomorrow. > > 4. The name of Greek CP modules should be fixed, > Now we have EL* and GR* files and CP names. > We should use only one prefix. > > 5. I think that it's time to finally switch to HB_STATIC_STARTUP in > all C++ builds also for MSC and G++. BTW can someone check if it's > possible to mix .prg code compiled by MSVC in C and C++ modes without > any problems? Please add INIT PROCEDUREs to such module to check if > all are registered and executed. The order is less important but it > will be good to know if C and C++ modules use the same priority. I can make some tests. How to enable this mode? I made a test for mixing C++ and C code, and it worked without problem with current build. C INIT/EXIT was executed first. > 6. I'm also working on small Christmas gift but I do not know > if I find enough spare time to finish it so it's less important. Great, we can wait a few days I guess for these pending tasks. Brgds, Viktor ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009, Viktor Szakáts wrote: > > considering that currently all g++ > answer should be a "yes", though :) (gcc 2.95 is omnipresent on > > less-than-mainstream-but-still-important platforms, so compatibility > > with that should be a quite high priority.) > > Probably yes, especially since lot of ppl still use 3.4.x > even on Windows, although it's only a real problem if someone > is using 3.4.x with QT 4.5.x, even then it's currently not > fatal as HBQT uses an empty init/exit routine ATM. > > I don't know though how grave the problem is, so, if it's > not an easy fix, I think can live with that issue until next it's an easy one (switch g++ to static startup), in fact przemek has just included this in his list 3 minutes before i sent my mail, so i consider this taken are of -- [-] mkdir /nonexistent ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Viktor Szakáts wrote: > It's fine with me and the modification is an easy one > (and should also be done in hbmk2.prg), but before I > do it, can other *nix experts give a short opinion or > confirmation? > > To me /opt looks like a grey area. /opt : Add-on application software packages Purpose /opt is reserved for the installation of add-on application software packages. A package to be installed in /opt must locate its static files in a separate /opt/ or /opt/ directory tree, where is a name that describes the software package and is the provider's LANANA registered name. on the net you'll find many references to /opt/java or /opt/oracle... it's always been the place to put what is not managed by the packaging system. best regards, Lorenzo ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
>> I'd like to ask everyone if there are any >> patches, commits or fixes pending? (besides >> hbqt related modules) > > this should worth a yes/no/after release: > > Message-ID: > > or alternatively > > http://old.nabble.com/g%2B%2B2.95-g%2B%2B3.3-bad-build-td26806223.html > > considering that currently all g++ answer should be a "yes", though :) (gcc 2.95 is omnipresent on > less-than-mainstream-but-still-important platforms, so compatibility > with that should be a quite high priority.) Probably yes, especially since lot of ppl still use 3.4.x even on Windows, although it's only a real problem if someone is using 3.4.x with QT 4.5.x, even then it's currently not fatal as HBQT uses an empty init/exit routine ATM. I don't know though how grave the problem is, so, if it's not an easy fix, I think can live with that issue until next release, when we can also add support for those rarer platforms to make system. Brgds, Viktor ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
On 2009 Dec 19, at 12:15, Lorenzo Fiorini wrote: > On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Viktor Szakáts wrote: > >> I'd like to ask everyone if there are any >> patches, commits or fixes pending? (besides >> hbqt related modules) > > I think /opt should be removed from HB_SYSLOC logic in global.mk > /opt is not a system dir It's fine with me and the modification is an easy one (and should also be done in hbmk2.prg), but before I do it, can other *nix experts give a short opinion or confirmation? To me /opt looks like a grey area. Brgds, Viktor ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009, Viktor Szakáts wrote: hi, > I'd like to ask everyone if there are any > patches, commits or fixes pending? (besides > hbqt related modules) this should worth a yes/no/after release: Message-ID: or alternatively http://old.nabble.com/g%2B%2B2.95-g%2B%2B3.3-bad-build-td26806223.html considering that currently all g++ http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: Hi All, > I'd like to ask everyone if there are any > patches, commits or fixes pending? (besides > hbqt related modules) 1. I'm making some experiments with DXE support in DJGPP builds. DXE is sth like DLL for DJGPP. Tomorrow I should finish it. 2. I'll commit ASAP some modifications for DOS DJGPP and OpenWatcom builds which will enable or disable default DLL support for them depending on results of my current tests. If I do not find enough time to finish them then I'll simply disable DLLs in DOS builds as temporary solution. 3. I will want to commit modifications for .prg HB_TRACE() interface ASAP. If possible I'll commit it tomorrow. 4. The name of Greek CP modules should be fixed, Now we have EL* and GR* files and CP names. We should use only one prefix. 5. I think that it's time to finally switch to HB_STATIC_STARTUP in all C++ builds also for MSC and G++. BTW can someone check if it's possible to mix .prg code compiled by MSVC in C and C++ modes without any problems? Please add INIT PROCEDUREs to such module to check if all are registered and executed. The order is less important but it will be good to know if C and C++ modules use the same priority. 6. I'm also working on small Christmas gift but I do not know if I find enough spare time to finish it so it's less important. best regards, Przemek ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Re: [Harbour] Any commits/fixes pending?
On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Viktor Szakáts wrote: > I'd like to ask everyone if there are any > patches, commits or fixes pending? (besides > hbqt related modules) I think /opt should be removed from HB_SYSLOC logic in global.mk /opt is not a system dir best regards, Lorenzo ___ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
