Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "r58548".
Did you mean:
558548
2008 Nov 02
0
[LLVMdev] 2.4 Pre-release (v2)
Tanya M. Lattner dixit:
>LLVMers,
>
>The 2.4 pre-release (v2) is available for testing:
>http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.4/
Is it correct that there is no matching clang distfile?
A checkout of clang r58548 does not build with the prerelease,
seems to require a newer version of llvm-current.
(But then, maybe it’d be best anyway if I port llvm-current to
MirBSD, because it’ll be easier for you to merge the diffs back in.)
bye,
//mirabilos
--
Sometimes they [people] care too much: pretty printers [an...
2008 Nov 02
2
[LLVMdev] clang (was Re: 2.4 Pre-release (v2))
Dixi quod…
>A checkout of clang r58548 does not build with the prerelease,
>seems to require a newer version of llvm-current.
However, clang r58565 does not build with llvm r58565 either:
llvm[4]: Compiling BasicConstraintManager.cpp for Release-Asserts build
mpcxx -I/usr/ports/lang/llvm/w-llvm-58565-0/llvm/include -I/usr/ports/lan...
2008 Oct 31
7
[LLVMdev] 2.4 Pre-release (v2)
LLVMers,
The 2.4 pre-release (v2) is available for testing:
http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.4/
If you have time, I'd appreciate anyone who can help test the release.
Please do the following:
1) Download/compile llvm source, and either compile llvm-gcc source or use
llvm-gcc binary.
2) Run make check, send me the testrun.log
3) Run "make TEST=nightly report" and send me the
2008 Nov 02
0
[LLVMdev] clang (was Re: 2.4 Pre-release (v2))
Hello, Thorsten
>>A checkout of clang r58548 does not build with the prerelease,
>>seems to require a newer version of llvm-current.
That's correct.
> Any suggestions?
Please do read http://clang.llvm.org/get_started.html about correct
way of building clang.
--
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Faculty of Mathematics and M...