search for: operating_systems

On Aug 17, 2012, at 2:50 AM, Paweł Bylica <pawel.bylica at ibs.org.pl> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Kaylor, Andrew <andrew.kaylor at intel.com> wrote: > Hi Paweł, > > > > Thanks for continuing this discussion. > > > > I like the simplicity of your suggestion. My only concern involves the ambiguity of what is meant by “environment”.

Hi Paweł, Thanks for continuing this discussion. I like the simplicity of your suggestion. My only concern involves the ambiguity of what is meant by “environment”. Presently there are functions in the llvm::Triple class to access the environment as an enumeration of a fixed set of values. It seems that some non-enumerated values are already in use, but introducing possible combinations of

On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Kaylor, Andrew <andrew.kaylor at intel.com>wrote: > Hi Paweł,**** > > ** ** > > Thanks for continuing this discussion.**** > > ** ** > > I like the simplicity of your suggestion. My only concern involves the > ambiguity of what is meant by “environment”. Presently there are functions > in the llvm::Triple class to access

ping From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Kaylor, Andrew Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 11:10 AM To: Jim Grosbach; Pawel Bylica; Chris Lattner Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu (LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu) Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] RFC: MCJIT enhancements Has anything more happened with this? -Andy From: Jim Grosbach [mailto:grosbach at apple.com] Sent:

Has anything more happened with this? -Andy From: Jim Grosbach [mailto:grosbach at apple.com] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 7:51 AM To: Paweł Bylica; Chris Lattner Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu (LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu); Kaylor, Andrew Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] RFC: MCJIT enhancements On Aug 17, 2012, at 2:50 AM, Paweł Bylica <pawel.bylica at ibs.org.pl<mailto:pawel.bylica at ibs.org.pl>>

Chris, are you OK with the below changes to the Triple? -Jim On Sep 4, 2012, at 5:21 PM, "Kaylor, Andrew" <andrew.kaylor at intel.com> wrote: > ping > > From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Kaylor, Andrew > Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 11:10 AM > To: Jim Grosbach; Pawel Bylica; Chris Lattner > Cc: llvmdev

On Sep 4, 2012, at 5:23 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: > Chris, are you OK with the below changes to the Triple? If at all possible, I'd like to keep the triple changes separate (separate patch series and separate discussion) from the other MCJIT changes. How dependent are the MCJIT improvements on the Triple changes? As you've noticed, Triple is not a

The past few packages on http://releases.llvm.org/download.html for mac have required the latest version of mac os. Previously they were built for 10.5 (I believe). I was just wondering if there is a technical reason for this change in requirements and if not, if it could be revered. I have systems I actively use which are 10.10 and 10.11 and it would be awesome if I didn't have to build

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Kaylor, Andrew <andrew.kaylor at intel.com>wrote: > > -------------------------------**** > > ELF Support on Windows**** > > -------------------------------**** > > **** > > There are various reasons that it would be nice to be able to support > generation of ELF objects on Windows through the MCJIT interface, one of >

Hi Zac, Thanks for the heads-up. I've started targeting a minimum macOS deployment target of 10.9 for the release binaries. Hope this helps. Let me know if there are any issues. vedant > On May 1, 2018, at 4:13 PM, Zac Hansen via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > The past few packages on http://releases.llvm.org/download.html

The other MCJIT improvements aren’t dependent on the triple changes at all. The reason that this came up in the context of MCJIT is that the quickest way to get MCJIT support on Windows is to enable the generation of ELF object images on Windows. We previously proposed a minimal approach of just adding “ELF” to the recognized triple environment strings. This is the way that MachO generation is

...f anyone wants to volunteer to be the "publicity coordinator", that would be great. I''m sure I''ll forget to update the RAA listing when we update each version, for example. And I just noticed that dmoz has a category waiting for us: http://dmoz.org/Computers/Software/Operating_Systems/Graphic_Subsystems/Toolkits/wxWindows/ Kevin

...ry this mailing list, maybe there are some experts who know what they're talking about. Please refer to my experts-exchange question, all the required information will be there. It is more practical to send you to the webpage than paste out what I've done. http://www.experts-exchange.com/Operating_Systems/Linux/Q_21882610.html Hope any can help find THE solution.

I described this off-list to Zac, but for anyone else who is following, simply specifying the target triple is not enough to have the build system set an older macOS deployment target. I.e the 6.0.0-rc1 binaries I've just uploaded have the same deployment target problem. Looking at the 5.0.0 and 6.0.0-rc1 binaries, I can confirm that their deployment target was too new: Load command 9

Hi All, I think Im having a mental block here. For some reason I just cant get my head round relationships. What I have is the following. 4 tables 1) Hosts 2) Software 3) OperatingSystem 4) Company In my terms (which are most likely wrong) a company can have lots of hosts, a host has lots of software, a host has one operating system. So should my models have the following relations in them?

I am trying to set up a flexible infrastructure for the assembly code. Basically what I want is configure.in determination of basic machine type (intel/compatible, alpha, ppc), then within that (say intel) the code will detect variants like MMX, SSE, and use the right routines. I know how to do the second, but what is a good way to do the first? Linux/Cygwin/Solaris seem to support the MACHTYPE

How is -mmacosx-version-min=10.9 being set? LLVM_COMPILE_FLAGS? Or CMAKE_CXX_COMPILE? > On May 2, 2018, at 19:22, Vedant Kumar via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I described this off-list to Zac, but for anyone else who is following, simply specifying the target triple is not enough to have the build system set an older macOS deployment target. I.e the 6.0.0-rc1

>>>>> I?aki ?car writes: Same from here: in addition to what the standards say, it always pays to be defensive and check "Portable Shell Programming" in the Autoconf manual. Among other things, this says '$((EXPRESSION))' Arithmetic expansion is not portable as some shells (most notably Solaris 10 '/bin/sh') don't support it. motivating

Hi, I've been looking into LLVM and I'm quite exited about the power it provides. Now, I'm not into compiler/optimizer development, which I guess is the main focus of LLVM. However, I've looked at the publications about safety and I'm amazed that the overhead is so low (ref "Segment Protection for Embedded Systems Using Run-time Checks"). Most of this work

On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 05:15:36PM -0700, Josh Coalson wrote: > I am trying to set up a flexible infrastructure for the assembly > code. Basically what I want is configure.in determination of > basic machine type (intel/compatible, alpha, ppc), then within > that (say intel) the code will detect variants like MMX, SSE, > and use the right routines. > > I know how to do the