llvm dev - Jan 2013 - [LLVMdev] Obsolete PTX is NOT completely removed in 3.2 release

Hi Pawel,

  PTX already be replaced with NVPTX. However, PTX subdirectory
still sit in lib/Target in 3.2 release. Do you think update the
release tarball is a good idea? Also could you remove it from
the trunk?

  Thanks.

Regards,
chenwj

-- 
Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任)
Computer Systems Lab, Institute of Information Science,
Academia Sinica, Taiwan (R.O.C.)
Tel:886-2-2788-3799 #1667
Homepage: http://people.cs.nctu.edu.tw/~chenwj

Removed from trunk.  Pawel can decide if its necessary to update the
tarballs.

Thanks for the report!  Apparently git-svn does not delete removed
directories.


On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:36 AM, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) <
chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> wrote:
> Hi Pawel,
>
>   PTX already be replaced with NVPTX. However, PTX subdirectory
> still sit in lib/Target in 3.2 release. Do you think update the
> release tarball is a good idea? Also could you remove it from
> the trunk?
>
>   Thanks.
>
> Regards,
> chenwj
>
> --
> Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任)
> Computer Systems Lab, Institute of Information Science,
> Academia Sinica, Taiwan (R.O.C.)
> Tel:886-2-2788-3799 #1667
> Homepage: http://people.cs.nctu.edu.tw/~chenwj
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>


-- 

Thanks,

Justin Holewinski
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130111/cf9a4c06/attachment.html>

On 1/11/2013 7:15 AM, Justin Holewinski wrote:
> Removed from trunk.  Pawel can decide if its necessary to update the
> tarballs.
> 
> Thanks for the report!  Apparently git-svn does not delete removed
> directories.
PTX directories still exists in release_32 branch and RELEASE_32/final.
But they are all empty so PTX can not be build.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:36 AM, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) <
> chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Pawel,
>>
>>   PTX already be replaced with NVPTX. However, PTX subdirectory
>> still sit in lib/Target in 3.2 release. Do you think update the
>> release tarball is a good idea? Also could you remove it from
>> the trunk?
>>
>>   Thanks.
>>
>> Regards,
>> chenwj
>>
>> --
>> Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任)
>> Computer Systems Lab, Institute of Information Science,
>> Academia Sinica, Taiwan (R.O.C.)
>> Tel:886-2-2788-3799 #1667
>> Homepage: http://people.cs.nctu.edu.tw/~chenwj
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>>
> 
> 
>

On 11.01.2013, at 07:36, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw>
wrote:
> Hi Pawel,
> 
>  PTX already be replaced with NVPTX. However, PTX subdirectory
> still sit in lib/Target in 3.2 release. Do you think update the
> release tarball is a good idea? Also could you remove it from
> the trunk?
Please do not, under no circumstances, change the 3.2 release tarballs at this
point. They are mirrored around the world now with cryptographic hashes and
signatures. Changing them will break things for many people, especially for an
extremely minor thing like an empty directory.

I'm not sure if Pawel's tarball change should be reverted now as it
already caused uproar, so changing it back might only make matters worse.

- Ben

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at
gmail.com>wrote:
>
> On 11.01.2013, at 07:36, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) <chenwj at
iis.sinica.edu.tw>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Pawel,
> >
> >  PTX already be replaced with NVPTX. However, PTX subdirectory
> > still sit in lib/Target in 3.2 release. Do you think update the
> > release tarball is a good idea? Also could you remove it from
> > the trunk?
>
> Please do not, under no circumstances, change the 3.2 release tarballs at
> this point. They are mirrored around the world now with cryptographic
> hashes and signatures. Changing them will break things for many people,
> especially for an extremely minor thing like an empty directory.
>
> I'm not sure if Pawel's tarball change should be reverted now as it
> already caused uproar, so changing it back might only make matters worse.
>
The tarballs were changed?

>
> - Ben
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>


-- 

Thanks,

Justin Holewinski
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130111/dc29bcae/attachment.html>