Displaying 8 results from an estimated 8 matches for "buildslave2".
Did you mean:
buildslave
2018 Dec 17
4
Windows /bigobj
Hi,
Recently one Windows build bot failed by my commit, because the obj file
being generated is too big:
C:\ps4-buildslave2\llvm-clang-x86_64-expensive-checks-win\llvm\tools\clang\unittests\AST\ASTImporterTest.cpp
: fatal error C1128: number of sections exceeded object file format limit:
compile with /bigobj
Is there an LLVM policy to limit the maximum size of the generated obj
files?
If not then I suspect the only sol...
2016 Feb 02
2
[Zorg] Adding a new slave
...# Ubuntu 14.04 x86_64-scei-ps4, 2 x Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz
create_slave("ps4-buildslave1", properties={'jobs': 72}, max_builds=1),
+ # Windows 10 Pro x86_64-scei-ps4, 2 x Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz
+ create_slave("ps4-buildslave2", properties={'jobs': 72}, max_builds=1),
+
# NetBSD 7.0 amd64
create_slave("lldb-amd64-ninja-netbsd7", properties={'jobs': 3}, max_builds=1),
# FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT amd64
2017 Nov 07
4
Problem with 'sed' on one Windows bot?
...'t argue with the bots" but... but... "It's not my fault!"
If anybody has any insight it would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
--paulr
The failure is this:
Command Output (stdout):
--
$ "sed" "-E" "s/@ELF@(.*)/\1/;s/@MACHO@(.*)//" "C:\ps4-buildslave2\llvm-clang-x86_64-expensive-checks-win\llvm\test\DebugInfo\X86\dwarfdump-header-64.s"
$ "C:\ps4-buildslave2\llvm-clang-x86_64-expensive-checks-win\build\bin\llvm-mc.EXE" "-triple" "x86_64-unknown-linux" "-filetype=obj" "-o" "-"
# comm...
2019 Jan 31
2
[RFC] migrating past C++11
...therefore have no idea what they run. Here are the bots that will definitely break, with their maintainers:
>
> Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com>
> am1i-slv1 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.3) 4.8.4
> as-bldslv4 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0)
> ps4-buildslave2 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0)
>
> Hexagon QA <llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com>
> hexagon-build-02 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2
> hexagon-build-03 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2
>
> Vitaly Buka <vitalybuka at google.com>
> sanitizer...
2017 Dec 06
3
buildbot failure in LLVM on llvm-clang-x86_64-expensive-checks-win
...n builder llvm-clang-x86_64-
> expensive-checks-win while building llvm.
> Full details are available at:
> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/llvm-clang-x86_64-expensive-checks-
> win/builds/6552
>
> Buildbot URL: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/
>
> Buildslave for this Build: ps4-buildslave2
>
> Build Reason: scheduler
> Build Source Stamp: [branch trunk] 319649
> Blamelist: olista01
>
> BUILD FAILED: failed test-check-all
>
> sincerely,
> -The Buildbot
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list...
2019 Feb 02
2
[RFC] migrating past C++11
...eak, with their maintainers:
>>>
>>> Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com <mailto:gkistanova at gmail.com>>
>>> am1i-slv1 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.3) 4.8.4
>>> as-bldslv4 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0)
>>> ps4-buildslave2 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0)
>>>
>>> Hexagon QA <llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com <mailto:llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com>>
>>> hexagon-build-02 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2
>>> hexagon-build-03 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubunt...
2019 Feb 07
5
[RFC] migrating past C++11
...ere are the bots that will definitely break, with their maintainers:
>
> Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com <mailto:gkistanova at gmail.com>>
> am1i-slv1 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.3) 4.8.4
> as-bldslv4 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0)
> ps4-buildslave2 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0)
>
> Hexagon QA <llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com <mailto:llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com>>
> hexagon-build-02 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2
> hexagon-build-03 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2
>
> Vitaly Buk...
2019 Jan 26
4
[RFC] migrating past C++11
+1, thanks again for driving this.
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 3:57 PM JF Bastien via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> The discussion seems to have died down and gotten good consensus. I’ve
> therefore create a patch which applies the proposed soft-errors:
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D57264
>
>
> We’ll only migrate to hard-error (and start using new