search for: vak

...003-December/000693.html saying that the PR 12544 is not really the corresponding issue :) The correct one is PR 13392: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13392 Interesting fact is that -O2 (or -O3) goes somehow around this problem. It looks like -O2 is not used here: /home/vak/ssrc/llvm/mklib --tag=disable-shared --silent --mode=compile g++ -c -I/home/vak/ssrc/llvm/lib/Support -I/home/vak/ssrc/llvm/lib/Support -I/home/vak/ssrc/llvm/include -I/home/vak/ssrc/llvm/include -I../../include -I/home/vak/ssrc/llvm/include -D_GNU_SOURCE -D__STDC_LIMIT_MACROS -Wall -W -Wwrite-str...

Hi all, compilation of package llvm-1.0.tar.gz under redhat 9 is failed with following output: ------- make[3]: *** No rule to make target `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/runtime/GCCLibraries/crtend/BytecodeObj/C++-Exception.bc', needed by `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/lib/BytecodeLibs/libcrtend.bc'. Stop. make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/runtime/GCCLibraries/crtend' ...skipped ------- --- Valery A.Khamenya

Hi aLLvm, compiling LLVMrelease 1.0 under SuSE 9 brings the following: ------------------- vak at linux:~/llvm/llvm> make make[1]: Entering directory `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/lib/Support' Compiling CommandLine.cpp CommandLine.cpp: In function `void RemoveArgument(const char*, cl::Option*)': CommandLine.cpp:75: internal compiler error: in convert_from_eh_region_ranges_1 , at except....

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003, [koi8-r] "Valery A.Khamenya[koi8-r] " wrote: > compilation of package llvm-1.0.tar.gz under redhat 9 is failed with > following output: > make[3]: *** No rule to make target `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/runtime/GCCLibraries/crtend/BytecodeObj/C++-Exception.bc', needed by `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/lib/BytecodeLibs/libcrtend.bc'. Stop. > make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/runtime/GCCLibraries/crtend' > ...skipped Makes sure that you have the C front-end installe...

...me to officially supply the required information about Gamatronic products to the community. Furthermore, I would like to know how our company may contribute to the development effort. I hope that relevant people can contact me to further discuss these subjects. BR, and Happy New Year! Leon Vak Control & Management Manager <http://www.gamatronic.com/> Mobile: +972 (0)54-4223027 Tel: +972 (0)2-5888270 Fax: +972 (0)2-5870262 <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Gamatronic-Electronic-Industries-Ltd/3875 3451224> <http://twitter.com/gamatronic/> <h...

...ugly. Compatibility with a broad range of compilers is important, > even if they are buggy. :) I see. The following ugly workaround helps: #ifdef NDEBUG bool b = getOption(ArgName) == Opt ; assert( b && "Arg not in map!"); #endif Well, one could camouflage this :) -- vak

...website for download. Although, it's best to contribute it since then in the future if another developer wants to change the module interface, he will have to do the work to change it in all of the modules that are distributed with NUT. I hope that helps! Ted On 12/16/2013 11:55 PM, Leon Vak wrote: > Greetings to all developers of the Network UPS Tools, and Merry > Christmas greetings to those of you who celebrate! > > I have been looking in to your work from time to time, and I am very > impressed with your efforts. I think this is a good time to officially > supply...

...ox). OK-OK, I will be a SuSE-batman for a while :) > Can you provide some patches? :) I do believe that the right way here is to provide some patches to newest gcc instead. If it fails, then let's polute nice llvm sources. I am waiting for feedback from SuSE team. have a nice day! -- vak

...-OK, let's save the world :) Well, I've made it. > It might be possible to hack your <cassert> header file or something > though... it is just a few places in three files as reported in my previous post. Then comes assert violation with message from llvm sources. regards, -- vak

Reid Spencer, thank you for your quick responce, finally i got to my PC at home. You wrote: > Attached are three files: "valery.cpp" which contains your original, > "reid.cpp" which contains corrections to most of the FIXME items and > "diffs" which shows the differences between them. The differences > should be instructive on what to do. You were

On Dec 18, 2013, at 3:17 AM, Leon Vak wrote: > Actually, someone has already done most of the work for our units, however I might have general technical details to contribute, like the fact that the driver for our equipment is called "gamatronic", while actually it is just the well-known SEC protocol (from the former Syst...

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, [koi8-r] "Valery A.Khamenya[koi8-r] " wrote: > > Can you provide some patches? :) > > I do believe that the right way here is to provide some patches to > newest gcc instead. If it fails, then let's polute nice llvm sources. > I am waiting for feedback from SuSE team. Even better, thanks a lot!! :) -Chris -- http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/

...bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12544 which is bug present in gcc 3.3.1 (from SUSE 9) This bug is fixed in 3.3.2 I don't know why SUSE team still denies to provide us with gcc 3.3.2 under SUSE 9 Hm, for suse 7.3 new gcc is already provided about a month ago or so... kind regards --- vak

...commit list: http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20040809/016952.html http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20040809/016955.html http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20040809/016956.html Thanks again for contributing this! Reid. vak wrote: > Reid Spencer, > > thank you for your quick responce, finally i got to my PC at home. > > You wrote: > >> Attached are three files: "valery.cpp" which contains your original, >> "reid.cpp" which contains corrections to most of the FIXME...

Valery, Attached are three files: "valery.cpp" which contains your original, "reid.cpp" which contains corrections to most of the FIXME items and "diffs" which shows the differences between them. The differences should be instructive on what to do. You were really, really close .. just a few details changing. The code in "reid.cpp" compiles but I

Hello list. I'm trying to rebuild the 2.6.9.67.0.20.EL kernel, but it fails even without modifications. How did I try it? Created a (non-root) build environment (not a mock ) Installed the kernel.scr.rpm and did a rpmbuild -ba --target=`uname -m` kernel-2.6.spec 2> prep-err.log | tee prep-out.log The build failed at the end: Processing files: kernel-xenU-devel-2.6.9-67.0.20.EL Checking