search for: mainlin

...nk that git generation numbers are sufficient for this so we don't need to resort to timestamps or tags. Mercurial has local revision numbers for this purpose, which I thought were quite handy. Comments on that point are welcome. I completely agree. The "branch" I most care about is mainline, and losing the ability to say "fixed in r1234" (with some sort of monotonically increasing number) would be a tragic loss. -Chris

On Jul 23, 2011, at 5:37 AM, FlyLanguage wrote: >>>> After git, mainline will still be the most important branch for >>>> the *project*, >>>> but you will work with quite a few branches on parallel. >>>> >>>> >>>> Who's mainline? :) Be prepared to assign a super-merger, like Linus, >>>>...

...new LLVM target more explicit and open. I'd also like to gauge interest in an idea I've discussed privately with a few community members, namely the concept of having a semi-official "incubation" system whereby proposed backends could get a trial run before becoming part of LLVM mainline. > > The proposed system would be something like this: a proposed contribution would receive a branch on llvm.org, and have six months (or some other predetermined length of time) to demonstrate that it and its developers are ready for mainline integration. At the end of their term, incuba...

On Jul 22, 2011, at 3:45 PM, Bob Wilson wrote: > > On Jul 22, 2011, at 3:33 PM, fly language wrote: > >> >> After git, mainline will still be the most important branch for the *project*, >> but you will work with quite a few branches on parallel. >> >> >> Who's mainline? :) Be prepared to assign a super-merger, like Linus, to maintain the "mainline". >> >> The git workfl...

...a release branch before creating it next time? Alternatively, can you leave branch creation up to the project maintainers as in the past? Pawel, you created a release_32 branch of SAFECode last night without my consultation. That commit itself is fine since we just happen to be tracking LLVM mainline right now; I'll just tell SAFECode developers to move development to the release_32 branch. However, in general, you can't assume that SAFECode mainline is tracking LLVM mainline; if you do, and we're not, you may fork a release branch before all changes to the previous release bra...

...o entry for some backends is being significantly raised, where they did not exist in the past. In the past AMD has reported issues that we have found from internal development to LLVM, along with patches in some cases. Some have been fixed, but others are unique to our backends and still are not in mainline. Many times the response to attempts to get them fixed has been to get the backend in the mainline development tree first. Now that we are finally able to push our backends out publicly, we are getting pushback that we need to contribute in other places first. While I completely agree with 4 of th...

Mainline and 4.3 branch GCC libstdc++ have removed string.h access from STL map etc. As a result several LLVM System files and others do not compile on mainline and 4.3. Aaron -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/att...

...tainers for a go/no-go for branch creation is a very good idea that should be incorporated into the LLVM release process. > > Pawel, you created a release_32 branch of SAFECode last night without my > consultation. That commit itself is fine since we just happen to be > tracking LLVM mainline right now; I'll just tell SAFECode developers to > move development to the release_32 branch. However, in general, you > can't assume that SAFECode mainline is tracking LLVM mainline; if you > do, and we're not, you may fork a release branch before all changes to > the prev...

On Jul 22, 2011, at 3:33 PM, fly language wrote: > > After git, mainline will still be the most important branch for the *project*, > but you will work with quite a few branches on parallel. > > > Who's mainline? :) Be prepared to assign a super-merger, like Linus, to maintain the "mainline". > > The git workflow works really really g...

...ich I suggest as 4.3 branch is not up for a release too soon ? Aaron ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Lattner" <sabre at nondot.org> To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 7:55 PM Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] GCC Mainline and GCC 4.3 STL mods > On Fri, 18 May 2007, Aaron Gray wrote: >> Mainline and 4.3 branch GCC libstdc++ have removed string.h access from >> STL map etc. >> >> As a result several LLVM System files and others do not compile on >> mainline and 4.3. > > Okay,...

When we back port patches from FSF GCC mainline, we decorate them with 'mainline' markers, for example /* APPLE LOCAL begin 4229621 mainline */ .... /* APPLE LOCAL end 4229621 mainline */ There are many examples of such markers in source. These markers help us resolve conflicts when we merge current sources in mass with FSF GCC...

On Fri, 18 May 2007, Aaron Gray wrote: > Mainline and 4.3 branch GCC libstdc++ have removed string.h access from > STL map etc. > > As a result several LLVM System files and others do not compile on > mainline and 4.3. Okay, will you please prepare and submit a patch that adds the needed #include's? -Chris -- http://nondot....

On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 04:00:49PM -0700, Chris Maness wrote: > When are these likely to hit the mainline release code? linux-next tomorrow. The first 7 patches are scheduled for mainline as they were merged + tested without any hiccups. These last few patches I'll wait and see. If nothing blows up on linux-next perhaps I'll include them to Linux for mainline during the next merge window....

...;> From: %vreg9<def> = TFRI 2; IntRegs:%vreg9 >>>>> To: >>>>> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. >>>>> 0x0000000001a0c814 in llvm::MachineOperand::isReg (this=0x7) at >>>>> /local/mnt/workspace/slarin/tools/llvm-mainline- >>>> merged/include/llvm/CodeGen/ >>>>> MachineOperand.h:204 >>>>> 204 bool isReg() const { return OpKind == MO_Register; } >>>>> (gdb) bt >>>>> #0 0x0000000001a0c814 in llvm::MachineOperand::isReg (this=0x7) at >&g...

The attached patch is a backport of patch 98010 from the gcc svn. It is useful mostly to make the porting of more ARM patches easier, but will be needed when we start to use C++ on ARM. Could someone please commit it to the svn? Thanks, Rafael -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: llvm-gcc-98010.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 13491 bytes Desc: not

I know that this is not the appropriate place :). You know someone can alternative to gluserfs ?:) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20090107/63b68a0d/attachment.html>

Hello Are there plans to merge the hpn-ssh (http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/) and the LPK (http://code.google.com/p/openssh-lpk/) into the mainline openssh. Adding lpk has been logged as a bug in bugzilla as They are two patches that I always apply as the performance boost from hpn-ssh is substantial to say the least, and centralisation of the authorized_keys into a LDAP server is a very helpful way to manage the authorized keys across a my...

On Nov 29, 2006, at 11:27 AM, Devang Patel wrote: > When we back port patches from FSF GCC mainline, we decorate them > with 'mainline' markers, for example > > /* APPLE LOCAL begin 4229621 mainline */ > .... > /* APPLE LOCAL end 4229621 mainline */ > > There are many examples of such markers in source. These markers > help us resolve conflicts when > we...

...;ve lately been able to track down a lot of application quirks (mostly problems with errors when saving, about files being locked) to the Mac resource fork files being indefinitely locked. Here's a sample from a `smbstatus` 14853 DENY_NONE 0x1 RDONLY NONE /files/HCMG/mainline/proto1/images/._neckpain.jpg Tue Apr 6 10:41:22 2004 14853 DENY_NONE 0x1 RDONLY NONE /files/HCMG/mainline/proto1/images/._golfers.jpg Tue Apr 6 10:41:18 2004 14853 DENY_NONE 0x1 RDONLY NONE /files/HCMG/mainline/proto1/._index.php Tue Apr...

...or you? I imagine adding support for it would be straightforward. > Also are there any current instructions for building > llvm/clang with SAFECode support from current svn? Yes. Directions can be found at http://sva.cs.illinois.edu/docs/Install.html#svn. Note that it is possible for mainline SAFECode and mainline LLVM/Clang to get out-of-sync since LLVM is currently under active development for the LLVM 3.0 release. If you run into a problem like that, please let me know. FWIW, I usually svn up LLVM and merge in mainline clang about once a day during the week (typically in the m...