search for: crazili

Subject kinda says it all. Here is my rationale: The test-suite is really weird relative to the rest of the LLVM project: 1) It contains all manner of crazily licensed code. 2) We don't really care about the history at all. Any concerns around linear history or bisection are pretty much irrelevant. 3) We don't ever plan to have LLVM code move into or out from the test-suite 4) Its already

I don't really care where the repository is located, but I do have some comments on the future test-suite directions: > On Feb 24, 2016, at 12:57 PM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Subject kinda says it all. Here is my rationale: > > The test-suite is really weird relative to the rest of the LLVM project: > 1) It contains all

On 2/24/16 4:25 PM, Matthias Braun via llvm-dev wrote: > I don't really care where the repository is located, but I do have > some comments on the future test-suite directions: > >> On Feb 24, 2016, at 12:57 PM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> Subject kinda says it all.

On 24 February 2016 at 20:57, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > The test-suite is really weird relative to the rest of the LLVM project: > 1) It contains all manner of crazily licensed code. > 2) We don't really care about the history at all. Any concerns around linear > history or bisection are pretty much irrelevant. > 3) We don't

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Subject kinda says it all. Here is my rationale: > > The test-suite is really weird relative to the rest of the LLVM project: > 1) It contains all manner of crazily licensed code. > 2) We don't really care about the history at all. Any concerns around linear > history

My biggest concerns and care-abouts are largely what Matthias expressed below. Most of them have been addressed already further down the thread. I hope that the move to github in practice would mean that the only difference is that I 'git clone https://github...' instead of 'git clone http://llvm.org/git/test-suite.git' ? Thanks, Kristof On 24/02/2016 22:25, Matthias Braun

Yes, I would hope that for most this boils down to cloning a different URL. Except for folks pushing patches to the test suite, I'm moderately confident there would be no other difference. It's the pushing patches side that would need to be sorted out in more detail. On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:48 AM Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com> wrote: > My biggest concerns and

On 2/24/16 1:57 PM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev wrote: > Subject kinda says it all. Here is my rationale: > > The test-suite is really weird relative to the rest of the LLVM project: > 1) It contains all manner of crazily licensed code. > 2) We don't really care about the history at all. Any concerns around > linear history or bisection are pretty much irrelevant. > 3)

Dear Chandler, First, can you articulate why you want to move the test suite to Github? Is it taking up too much space, or is there some other problem that you're trying to solve? I think you clearly explain why moving the revision history isn't necessary, but it's not clear to me what problem you are trying to solve. Second, if we move the revision history to Github, it would

Ah - I do commit to the test-suite from time to time. So, could the github-based project be set up so that we can just do 'git push'? Or would we have to go through the pull requests route on every commit? I'm afraid I've never committed to any github project before, so I am a bit confused on how committing would work in practice. Obviously, I hope for the mechanism to commit to

(As per IRC discussion) I understand that the carry-less multiplication algorithm has it's uses since/and it is implemented as an instruction in many architectures and that adding it as a general-purpose intrinsic will allow us to drop target-specific intrinsics as by-product. What i do *NOT* understand is: what is the actual/main goal/driving factor of adding an LLVM intrinsic for it? The

I''m using puppet 0.25.1. I''ve got a simple resource: exec { "/bin/ls $oracle_base/dba/bin/database_backup.ksh": logoutput => on_failure, } and I don''t want it to log every time it''s successfully run: $ sudo tail -F /var/log/messages | grep puppetd Feb 17 16:36:11 test puppetd[26614]: (//my_module/Exec[/bin/ls /u01/

Hello, Specifications of the environment: Samba 3.0.13 running on Solaris 8. This is configured as a domain member of a NT4 style PDC. The smb.conf file is provided for details. Problem definition: When trying to access the Samba server from a windows machine through network neighborhood, the system challenges the user for their credentials. On providing the username/password the system rejects