search for: laurov

...armel 2.6.24-rc7 #1 Wed Jan 16 02:28:08 CET 2008 armv5tel GNU/Linux http://llvm.org/nightlytest/machine.php?machine=335 However, some other nightly testers may be running cross-compilers (but are probably still running the tests via QEMU or similar emulator): Nickname:lauro-armv6-N800 uname:Linux laurov-laptop 2.6.20-16-generic #2 SMP Thu Jun 7 20:19:32 UTC 2007 i686 GNU/Linux http://llvm.org/nightlytest/machine.php?machine=172 Nickname:lauro-armv5te-softfloat uname:Linux laurov-desktop 2.6.17-11-generic #2 SMP Tue Mar 13 23:32:38 UTC 2007 i686 GNU/Linux http://llvm.org/nightlytest/machine.php?ma...

Hi, This is a simple question about building ARM cross-compiler. What is the building procedure using LLVM 2.4 and GCC front-end 4.2? I used these commands for LLVM, and it is okay. $ ../configure --prefix=/usr/local -target=arm $ make ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=0 $ make ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=0 install Then these commands were used for GCC front-end but this got couple of errors. $ ../configure

On May 12, 2008, at 10:19 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > Am Montag, den 12.05.2008, 09:08 -0700 schrieb Devang Patel: >> On May 12, 2008, at 2:59 AM, Pertti Kellomäki wrote: >> >>> 2) What is the relative performance of code generated by LLVM >>> and gcc respectively? >> >> See llvm.org/nightlytest > > Which does not compare GCC vs. LLVM.

Am Montag, den 12.05.2008, 09:08 -0700 schrieb Devang Patel: > On May 12, 2008, at 2:59 AM, Pertti Kellomäki wrote: > > > 2) What is the relative performance of code generated by LLVM > > and gcc respectively? > > See llvm.org/nightlytest Which does not compare GCC vs. LLVM. (I haven't seen this announced as the nightly tester's purpose either.) > Many

Mark Kromis wrote: > On Dec 27, 2008, at 7:41 PM, Misha Brukman wrote: >> 2008/12/27 Mark Kromis <greybird at mac.com> >> Just a curiosity question, why push for gtest vs Boost Test or a >> different test suite? >> I normally use Boost, and their test suite, so I'm more familiar with >> that. So I was wondering is one better then the other, or is it

...quot; section of http://llvm.org/nightlytest . I see 16 reports there. (Yesterday, I didn't count S3_AMD64 in because it had just three results, but it seems that it is reporting on a regular basis.) I had tried to group machines by tester, giving me four (now five) names: lattner, grawp, grue, laurov, and s3lap. > What specifically > are you looking for? If you care about a specific metric, you should > measure it yourself. Sorry. I think there's some lingering frustration on my side at work. I had tried to get the nightly tester to run, found it difficult, had postponed it...