Chris and Bill,
I have tested the proposed patch from...
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2008-August/016490.html
under i686-apple-darwin9 and it solves the problems building gfortran
from llvm svn. The resulting compiler works fine so can we get that
patch in before 2.4 is release?
Jack
ps We do have one oddity left in llvm-gfortran from current llvm
svn. I find everytime I compile something with llvm-gfortran that
I get a series of warning messages...
f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for
C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran
f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat-security" is valid for
C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran
f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-format-extra-args" is valid
for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran
f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-format-zero-length" is valid
for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran
f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-nonnull" is valid for
C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran
Is this something we can suppress easily for the 2.4 release?
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo.msbb.uc.edu> wrote:> Chris and Bill, > I have tested the proposed patch from... > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2008-August/016490.html > > under i686-apple-darwin9 and it solves the problems building gfortran > from llvm svn. The resulting compiler works fine so can we get that > patch in before 2.4 is release?I applied it to mainline.> ps We do have one oddity left in llvm-gfortran from current llvm > svn. I find everytime I compile something with llvm-gfortran that > I get a series of warning messages... > > f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat-security" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-format-extra-args" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-format-zero-length" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-nonnull" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > > Is this something we can suppress easily for the 2.4 release? >Ick! Those are enabled in the config/i386/darwin.h file. I don't know how to turn them off for Fortran et al. Anyone else know? -bw
Tanya M. Lattner
2008-Oct-31 01:03 UTC
[LLVMdev] gfortran link failure in current llvm svn
Sorry, all of this is too late for 2.4. -Tanya On Thu, 30 Oct 2008, Jack Howarth wrote:> Chris and Bill, > I have tested the proposed patch from... > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2008-August/016490.html > > under i686-apple-darwin9 and it solves the problems building gfortran > from llvm svn. The resulting compiler works fine so can we get that > patch in before 2.4 is release? > Jack > ps We do have one oddity left in llvm-gfortran from current llvm > svn. I find everytime I compile something with llvm-gfortran that > I get a series of warning messages... > > f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat-security" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-format-extra-args" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-format-zero-length" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-nonnull" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > > Is this something we can suppress easily for the 2.4 release? > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 05:38:30PM -0700, Bill Wendling wrote:> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo.msbb.uc.edu> wrote: > > Chris and Bill, > > I have tested the proposed patch from... > > > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2008-August/016490.html > > > > under i686-apple-darwin9 and it solves the problems building gfortran > > from llvm svn. The resulting compiler works fine so can we get that > > patch in before 2.4 is release? > > I applied it to mainline. > > > ps We do have one oddity left in llvm-gfortran from current llvm > > svn. I find everytime I compile something with llvm-gfortran that > > I get a series of warning messages... > > > > f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > > f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat-security" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > > f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-format-extra-args" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > > f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-format-zero-length" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > > f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-nonnull" is valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > > > > Is this something we can suppress easily for the 2.4 release? > > > Ick! Those are enabled in the config/i386/darwin.h file. I don't know > how to turn them off for Fortran et al. Anyone else know? > > -bwActually this does qualify as a regression fix since the gfortran built on darwin in llvm 2.3 (unless llvm.org is going to claim that no other compilers than c, c++ and objc matter). Jack
On Oct 30, 2008, at 5:23 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:> ps We do have one oddity left in llvm-gfortran from current llvm > svn. I find everytime I compile something with llvm-gfortran that > I get a series of warning messages... > > f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for C/C++/ > ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat-security" is valid for > C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-format-extra-args" is valid > for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-format-zero-length" is > valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-nonnull" is valid for C/C++/ > ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > > Is this something we can suppress easily for the 2.4 release?Unfortunately, it is too late for the 2.4 release, however, now is a great time to fix it for 2.5. Once it is fixed in mainline, it would be great to get a tester set up to verify that we don't regress on this, -Chris
On Oct 30, 2008, at 11:02 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:> On Oct 30, 2008, at 5:23 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: >> ps We do have one oddity left in llvm-gfortran from current llvm >> svn. I find everytime I compile something with llvm-gfortran that >> I get a series of warning messages... >> >> f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for C/C++/ >> ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran >> f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat-security" is valid for >> C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran >> f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-format-extra-args" is valid >> for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran >> f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-format-zero-length" is >> valid for C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran >> f951: warning: command line option "-Wno-nonnull" is valid for C/C++/ >> ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran >> >> Is this something we can suppress easily for the 2.4 release?Jack, Try this not so elegant and untested patch. - Devang Index: lang-specs.h ==================================================================--- lang-specs.h (revision 57986) +++ lang-specs.h (working copy) @@ -14,7 +14,9 @@ "cc1 -E -lang-fortran -traditional-cpp -D_LANGUAGE_FORTRAN % (cpp_options) \ %{E|M|MM:%(cpp_debug_options)}\ %{!M:%{!MM:%{!E: -o %|.f |\n\ - f951 %|.f %{!ffree-form:-ffixed-form} %(cc1_options) %{J*} %{I*}\ + f951 %|.f %{!ffree-form:-ffixed-form} %(cc1_options) \ + %<Wformat %<Wformat-security %<Wno-format-extra-args %<Wno-format- zero-length %<Wno-nonull \ + %{J*} %{I*}\ "/* LLVM LOCAL */" \ %(llvm_options) \ -fpreprocessed %{!nostdinc:-I finclude%s} %{!fsyntax-only:% (invoke_as)}}}}", 0, 0, 0}, @@ -25,21 +27,27 @@ "cc1 -E -lang-fortran -traditional-cpp -D_LANGUAGE_FORTRAN % (cpp_options) \ %{E|M|MM:%(cpp_debug_options)}\ %{!M:%{!MM:%{!E: -o %|.f95 |\n\ - f951 %|.f95 %{!ffixed-form:-ffree-form} %(cc1_options) %{J*} %{I*}\ + f951 %|.f95 %{!ffixed-form:-ffree-form} %(cc1_options) \ + %<Wformat %<Wformat-security %<Wno-format-extra-args %<Wno-format- zero-length %<Wno-nonull \ + %{J*} %{I*}\ "/* LLVM LOCAL */" \ %(llvm_options) \ -fpreprocessed %{!nostdinc:-I finclude%s} %{!fsyntax-only:% (invoke_as)}}}}", 0, 0, 0}, {".f90", "@f95", 0, 0, 0}, {".f95", "@f95", 0, 0, 0}, {".f03", "@f95", 0, 0, 0}, -{"@f95", "%{!E:f951 %i %(cc1_options) %{J*} %{I*}\ +{"@f95", "%{!E:f951 %i %(cc1_options) \ + %<Wformat %<Wformat-security %<Wno-format-extra-args %<Wno- format-zero-length %<Wno-nonull \ + %{J*} %{I*}\ "/* LLVM LOCAL */" \ %(llvm_options) \ %{!nostdinc:-I finclude%s} %{!fsyntax-only:%(invoke_as)}}", 0, 0, 0}, {".f", "@f77", 0, 0, 0}, {".for", "@f77", 0, 0, 0}, {".FOR", "@f77", 0, 0, 0}, -{"@f77", "%{!E:f951 %i %{!ffree-form:-ffixed-form} %(cc1_options) % {J*} %{I*}\ +{"@f77", "%{!E:f951 %i %{!ffree-form:-ffixed-form} %(cc1_options) \ + %<Wformat %<Wformat-security %<Wno-format-extra-args %<Wno- format-zero-length %<Wno-nonull \ + %{J*} %{I*}\ "/* LLVM LOCAL */" \ %(llvm_options) \ %{!nostdinc:-I finclude%s} %{!fsyntax-only:%(invoke_as)}}", 0, 0, 0},
Seemingly Similar Threads
- [LLVMdev] gfortran link failure in current llvm svn
- [LLVMdev] gfortran link failure in current llvm svn
- [LLVMdev] gfortran link failure in current llvm svn
- [LLVMdev] gfortran link failure in current llvm svn
- [LLVMdev] llvm/llvm-gcc-4.2 svn still produces -Wformat/-Wformat-security