Displaying 12 results from an estimated 12 matches for "archivememb".
Did you mean:
archivemember
2006 May 06
0
[LLVMdev] Still Trying to Build on MINGW
...m is
that Path::isValid() will reject a string containing "<" and ">" on
Windows.
Note that this is not the case on Unix -- compare the implementation of
Path::isValid() in .../Unix/Path.inc to the one in .../Win32/Path.inc.
Probably the right place to make the fix is in
ArchiveMember::ArchiveMember() (Archive.cpp circa line 43).
As per the comment this constructor is being used to make a "sentry node"
in an ilist. In the initializations you will see `path("<invalid>")' which
on Windows should be something else (perhaps just use
`path("--inv...
2006 May 06
4
[LLVMdev] Still Trying to Build on MINGW
1. I got the tools to build. Yay!
2. I got past all the annoying trouble with not finding header files. Yay!
Now I'm having problems with this:
llvm-ar rc ./libgcc.a libgcc/./_muldi3.o <and-lots-more-.o-files...>
C:\msys\1.0\home\llvm_home\install\bin\llvm-ar.exe: <invalid>: path is not valid
I'm investigating this with the debugger and so far I've learned that
2006 May 06
2
[LLVMdev] Still Trying to Build on MINGW
...ct a string containing "<" and ">" on
> Windows.
>
> Note that this is not the case on Unix -- compare the implementation of
> Path::isValid() in .../Unix/Path.inc to the one in .../Win32/Path.inc.
>
> Probably the right place to make the fix is in
> ArchiveMember::ArchiveMember() (Archive.cpp circa line 43).
>
> As per the comment this constructor is being used to make a "sentry node"
> in an ilist. In the initializations you will see `path("<invalid>")' which
> on Windows should be something else (perhaps just u...
2006 May 06
2
[LLVMdev] Still Trying to Build on MINGW
..." on
>>> Windows.
>>>
>>> Note that this is not the case on Unix -- compare the implementation of
>>> Path::isValid() in .../Unix/Path.inc to the one in .../Win32/Path.inc.
>>>
>>> Probably the right place to make the fix is in
>>> ArchiveMember::ArchiveMember() (Archive.cpp circa line 43).
>>>
>>> As per the comment this constructor is being used to make a "sentry
>>> node"
>>> in an ilist. In the initializations you will see `path("<invalid>")'
>>> which
>&...
2006 May 06
0
[LLVMdev] Still Trying to Build on MINGW
...ot;<" and ">" on
>> Windows.
>>
>> Note that this is not the case on Unix -- compare the implementation of
>> Path::isValid() in .../Unix/Path.inc to the one in .../Win32/Path.inc.
>>
>> Probably the right place to make the fix is in
>> ArchiveMember::ArchiveMember() (Archive.cpp circa line 43).
>>
>> As per the comment this constructor is being used to make a "sentry node"
>> in an ilist. In the initializations you will see `path("<invalid>")' which
>> on Windows should be something else...
2006 May 07
0
[LLVMdev] Still Trying to Build on MINGW
...dows.
>>>>
>>>> Note that this is not the case on Unix -- compare the implementation of
>>>> Path::isValid() in .../Unix/Path.inc to the one in .../Win32/Path.inc.
>>>>
>>>> Probably the right place to make the fix is in
>>>> ArchiveMember::ArchiveMember() (Archive.cpp circa line 43).
>>>>
>>>> As per the comment this constructor is being used to make a "sentry node"
>>>> in an ilist. In the initializations you will see `path("<invalid>")'
>>>> which
&g...
2005 Apr 21
0
[LLVMdev] misc CVS patches
...================================================
>RCS file: /var/cvs/llvm/llvm/lib/Bytecode/Archive/Archive.cpp,v
>retrieving revision 1.6
>diff -u -r1.6 Archive.cpp
>--- Archive.cpp 28 Jan 2005 01:17:07 -0000 1.6
>+++ Archive.cpp 21 Apr 2005 15:13:24 -0000
>@@ -40,8 +40,8 @@
> ArchiveMember::ArchiveMember()
> : next(0), prev(0), parent(0), path("<invalid>"), flags(0), data(0)
> {
>- info.user = 1000;
>- info.group = 1000;
>+ info.user = getuid();
>+ info.group = getgid();
> info.mode = 0777;
> info.fileSize = 0;
> info.modTi...
2006 May 07
1
[LLVMdev] Still Trying to Build on MINGW
...not the case on Unix -- compare the
>>>>> implementation of
>>>>> Path::isValid() in .../Unix/Path.inc to the one in
>>>>> .../Win32/Path.inc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Probably the right place to make the fix is in
>>>>> ArchiveMember::ArchiveMember() (Archive.cpp circa line 43).
>>>>>
>>>>> As per the comment this constructor is being used to make a
>>>>> "sentry node"
>>>>> in an ilist. In the initializations you will see
>>>>> `path("...
2005 Nov 22
2
[LLVMdev] llvm-ranlib: Bus Error in regressions + fix
...b/libstdc++.so.5
#2 0x4009c818 in std::basic_filebuf<char, std::char_traits<char>
>::xsputn(char const*, int) () from /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5
#3 0x400cbed1 in std::ostream::write(char const*, int) ()
from /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5
#4 0x0829c9d0 in llvm::Archive::writeMember(llvm::ArchiveMember
const&, std::basic_ofstream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, bool,
bool, bool) (
this=0x8356088, member=@0x8356180, ARFile=@0xbfffd630,
CreateSymbolTable=false, TruncateNames=false, ShouldCompress=false)
at ArchiveWriter.cpp:294
#5 0x0829d297 in llvm::Archive...
2005 Apr 20
8
[LLVMdev] misc CVS patches
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 12:12:54PM +0200, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:
> Misha Brukman wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 07:01:40AM +0200, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer
> >wrote: Have you considered using bugpoint for your codegen debugging
> >needs? http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/Bugpoint.html#codegendebug
>
> Well, the (critical) bug in question was
>
2005 Nov 22
0
[LLVMdev] llvm-ranlib: Bus Error in regressions + fix
...0x4009c818 in std::basic_filebuf<char, std::char_traits<char>
> >::xsputn(char const*, int) () from /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5
> #3 0x400cbed1 in std::ostream::write(char const*, int) ()
> from /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5
> #4 0x0829c9d0 in llvm::Archive::writeMember(llvm::ArchiveMember const&,
> std::basic_ofstream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, bool, bool, bool) (
> this=0x8356088, member=@0x8356180, ARFile=@0xbfffd630,
> CreateSymbolTable=false, TruncateNames=false, ShouldCompress=false)
> at ArchiveWriter.cpp:294
> #5 0x0829...
2007 Jul 05
2
[LLVMdev] PATCH (rest of code changes) "bytecode" --> "bitcode"
Here is the bulk of the sanitizing.
My residual doubts center around the question
whether we still do/want to support (un)compressed *byte*code
in 2.0/2.1.
I need a definitive word on this to proceed.
My understanding is that bytecode is already gone, but there are
still some functions/enums that really deal with *byte*code
(instead of *bit*code).
I did not touch those areas, so the attached