search for: dreamwidth

The LLVM 2.7 release notes say you can use ./configure --enable-shared to build LLVM as a shared library (libLLVM2.7.so), and the LLVM tools will link against that instead of including the static libraries, so I was wondering: Is there a way to configure LLVM the same way using CMake (so it can work on Windows)? In the other direction, is there an equivalent ./configure flag to setting

Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: > The following message is a courtesy copy of an article > that has been posted to gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel as well. > > nobled <nobled at dreamwidth.org> writes: > >>>> The LLVM 2.7 release notes say you can use ./configure --enable-shared >>>> to build LLVM as a shared library (libLLVM2.7.so), and the LLVM tools >>>> will link against that instead of including the static libraries, so I >>>&gt...

Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: > The following message is a courtesy copy of an article > that has been posted to gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel as well. > > nobled <nobled at dreamwidth.org> writes: > >> The LLVM 2.7 release notes say you can use ./configure --enable-shared >> to build LLVM as a shared library (libLLVM2.7.so), and the LLVM tools >> will link against that instead of including the static libraries, so I >> was wondering: >> >&g...

The attached patch gets rid of the "error C2668" mentioned on the wiki page (all the other errors seem to be fixed in SVN already AFAICT): http://wiki.llvm.org/How_do_I_compile_on_Visual_C%2B%2B%3F Applying this to trunk fixes http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=5592 for me. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name:

nobled <nobled at dreamwidth.org> writes: [snip] Please move the new code to a new file named cmake/modules/WindowsCRTControl.cmake and include it from the top level CMakeLists when LLVM_ON_WIN32.

Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: > The following message is a courtesy copy of an article > that has been posted to gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel as well. > > nobled <nobled at dreamwidth.org> writes: > > [snip] > > Please move the new code to a new file named > cmake/modules/WindowsCRTControl.cmake and include it from the top level > CMakeLists when LLVM_ON_WIN32. Isn't it only ever used when "if (MSVC)" though, not on WIN32 in general? (I also...

nobled <nobled at dreamwidth.org> writes: >> AFAIK, the `configure&make' build had so-so support for shared >> libraries. Maybe that is fixed now. What they implemented recently was >> one option for generating a single shared library containing all LLVM. > > Right, that was my original ques...

...on parameters" parameters section actually seem to work only on the function arguments and not the return parameter. Is this intentional? What should I do if I need to get or set the return parameter attributes of a function from OCaml? — j h woodyatt <jhw at conjury.org> http://jhw.dreamwidth.org/

Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: > I'm a bit wary about this patch. So much complexity for so petty > feature... Maybe the right thing is to determine the scenarios where > people set LLVM_USE_CRT. Maybe all we need is to define another build > type that inherits from Release which uses the debug version of the CRT. > > Anyways, the patch have some issues:

...n manually is user enabled and supported. The distro has nothing to do with it. > Would it be *nice* if RHEL/Fedora/CentOS could do this? Sure. Is it a necessary prerequisite? Absolutely not. I disagree. Along the same lines as this, relating primarily to security and privacy: http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/32686.html I'll argue that the four freedoms aren't meaningful when they only benefit a scant minority. And the end result is, increasingly, developers are picking Macs because so many basic UI/UX things are handled so well and continue to be a PITA on Linux (desktop in particular). ht...

nobled <nobled at dreamwidth.org> writes: >>> The LLVM 2.7 release notes say you can use ./configure --enable-shared >>> to build LLVM as a shared library (libLLVM2.7.so), and the LLVM tools >>> will link against that instead of including the static libraries, so I >>> was wondering: &gt...

> Ady wrote: > > The reason genisoimage is highly modified is because... It is > > unmaintained! > > Sad but true. The cdrkit website is gone. Most "original" is > the debian source package. > > > > The "real" genisoimage (and any reincarnation of > > it) might never work with Syslinux; who knows? > > It works fine for BIOS

On 11/23/2016 2:02 PM, Tony Molloy wrote: > precision 15 7510 > > Intel? Core i5-6300HQ Processor (Quad Core 2.30G that too is a "skylake", latest gen intel CPU, you might have some issues with CentOS and the USB C/Thunderport, and/or USB 3 on those. If it works on Ubuntu, you likely can get it working with C7 albeit maybe using a newer kernel. unless you're going

...ave some comments about the Mercurial aspect of the discussion. On Jul 22, 2011, at 2:02 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: > > Comments on that point [Mercurial and local revision numbers] are welcome. Oh, I really doubt that's true. I'm a big Mercurial proponent, c.f. ... <http://jhw.dreamwidth.org/1868.html> <http://jhw.dreamwidth.org/2049.html> ...but even I know when to shut up and just go along to get along. If folks want LLVM to use a DVCS instead of Subversion, then I will be cheering from the sidelines if LLVM switches to Git. For my purposes, I'll just use the Hg...

Did the project ever come to a decision about making a transition to git? I'm trying to do some longer-term planning and it would be helpful to know what the roadmap is. Thanks! -Dave

...dex ~0UL, but no similar functions for handling the function return parameter attribute at index zero. Is this intentional? What is the correct way to get and set a function return parameter attribute with C-language binding to the LLVM core? — j h woodyatt <jhw at conjury.org> http://jhw.dreamwidth.org/

...a GPT partition with type GUID C12A7328-F81F-11D2-BA4B-00A0C93EC93B Both alternatives demand neat partitioning. Especially no nested partitions. isohybrid violates UEFI by combining both methods and by nesting partitions. The motivation for this is given by Matthew Garrett in http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/11285.html I made a lengthy analysis about Debian's sins and improvement options in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=776317#75 > With these made-up assumptions, the ISO image > could have the same "EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI" UEFI 2.4. does not promise any c...

This lets CMake's GUI frontend show a drop-down list of the limited possible values for LLVM_USE_CRT, instead of the current freeform input field, so using the variable is less error-prone. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: add-strings-property-to-msvc-crt.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 673 bytes Desc: not available URL:

Hi James, > Is it my imagination, or is there no way in LLVM 2.8 (or current trunk) to use the facilities defined in<llvm-c/Core.h> to get or set the optional return parameter attribute on a function value? > > All the functions in the "Operations on parameters" parameters section actually seem to work only on the function arguments and not the return parameter. Is this

On Aug 11, 2011, at 11:03 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > On Aug 11, 2011, at 5:17 AM, Florian Merz wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> we'd like to be able to check for loss of information in trunc operations in >> our LLVM-based bounded model checker [1]. For this it is important if the >> trunc was on a signed or unsigned integer, so we need nsw and nuw