On Sat, 2006-12-30 at 11:53 -0800, Chris Lattner wrote:> On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, Reid Spencer wrote: > > You all just need remove "stacker_rt.ll". the stacker_rt.ll is a > > generated file, not source. The Makefile should have a dependency on > > llvm-gcc for it, but doesn't. Just remove stacker_rt.ll and the problem > > will go away. > > This presumably doesn't impact the testers, as they start from a clean > build every night. The testers are failing because the CFE's need to be > rebuilt so they output proper .ll files. Reid, can you change the > makefile rule to use "llvm-gcc -S -emit-llvm -o - | llvm-upgrade > $@" or > the equivalent?Which makefile rule?> > -Chris >
On Sun, 2006-12-31 at 13:37 -0800, Chris Lattner wrote:> On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, Reid Spencer wrote: > >>> You all just need remove "stacker_rt.ll". the stacker_rt.ll is a > >> rebuilt so they output proper .ll files. Reid, can you change the > >> makefile rule to use "llvm-gcc -S -emit-llvm -o - | llvm-upgrade > $@" or > >> the equivalent? > > > > Which makefile rule? > > The rule in the stacker makefile that builds stacker_rt.ll.Its not in Stacker's Makefile. It is in Makefile.rules. It was fixed to ensure the .ll version depended on llvm-gcc before you made your original comment. Reid.> > -Chris >
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, Reid Spencer wrote:>>> You all just need remove "stacker_rt.ll". the stacker_rt.ll is a >> rebuilt so they output proper .ll files. Reid, can you change the >> makefile rule to use "llvm-gcc -S -emit-llvm -o - | llvm-upgrade > $@" or >> the equivalent? > > Which makefile rule?The rule in the stacker makefile that builds stacker_rt.ll. -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/