similar to: add version check for gcc4

Scott Michel wrote: > That part about "native" -- yeah, it's there. The existence predicate > returns true. IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS EASILY SKIPPED OVER WHEN SKIMMING > THE DOCUMENT BECAUSE, HECK, THE GCC3 DRIVER COMPILES DIRECTLY TO > BYTECODE SO WHY DOESNT GCC4? > > It's a "least surprise" issue. If gcc3 produces bytecode directly, why > did the

Devang Patel wrote: > > On Aug 23, 2006, at 7:00 PM, Emil Mikulic wrote: > >> Where -is- that documented? >> >> The only reason I know about it is because of how many times it's come >> up on the list. =) > > http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html ? > > ... > Example with llvm-gcc4 > First, create a simple C file, name it

Hi Hendrik, On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 14:35 -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote: > I just downloaded the CVS version of llvm and llvm-test. Presumably > this is the one that's scheduled to become 1.8 in a few days. Not really. The current CVS head is quite a ways past release 1.8 at this point. If you want to get the release 1.8 preview, please check out the release_18 branch: cvs co -rrelease_18

On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 11:45:04 -0700, Reid Spencer wrote: > Hi Hendrik, > > On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 14:35 -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote: >> I just downloaded the CVS version of llvm and llvm-test. Presumably >> this is the one that's scheduled to become 1.8 in a few days. > > Not really. The current CVS head is quite a ways past release 1.8 at > this point. If you

Erick Tryzelaar wrote: >> It's a "least surprise" issue. If gcc3 produces bytecode directly, why >> did the gcc4 driver create such a large departure from original, >> expected functionality? It's a rhetorical question, BTW. >> > > I actually know this one :) I believe the powers that be decided that > having a gcc-compatible interface was

Ryan Brown wrote: > I don't think llvm-gcc4 uses gccas or gccld, but it can emit bytecode > if you give it the --emit-llvm option: > llvm-gcc --emit-llvm -c -o foo.bc foo.c That's a bit asymmetric with the previous gcc3 version, isn't it? That would mean that the "An Example Using the LLVM Tool Chain" section needs to be updated for the gcc4 frontend. OTOH, I could

Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > Actually, my request for more info in the "Getting Started" had some > hidden questions, as I don't know the answer to them :) So to be a > little more clear, here are the two I had: > > Does the gcc4 no longer need the "fixheaders" script that the gcc3.4 > frontends uses? > > Is it possible to install both the gcc4 and

On Aug 23, 2006, at 7:00 PM, Emil Mikulic wrote: > Where -is- that documented? > > The only reason I know about it is because of how many times it's come > up on the list. =) http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html ? ... Example with llvm-gcc4 First, create a simple C file, name it 'hello.c': #include <stdio.h> int main() { printf("hello

On Mar 31, 2007, at 11:35 PM, Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > I'm having some trouble getting llvm-gcc4 to compile. It's unable to > compile darwin-crt3.c. It's mentioning "Complex expression. Absolute > segment assumed." but I'm not sure if that's a real error message. Has > anyone run into this before? I'm running on a G4 apple 10.4.8, kernel > version

Chris Lattner wrote: > Patches welcome. Please send a patch, or even just some suggested > text, and we'll be happy to include it. Remember that the people who > usually end up writing the FAQ's already know all the answers, so it's > hard for us to see things from fresh perspectives sometimes :) > > -Chris > Actually, my request for more info in the

Dear R-Devel, we use R on 32 and 64 bit versions of RHEL AS 4 (U5) where the default compiler is gcc 3. However recently we have had problems updating MCMCpack which appears to require gcc4. I have a few questions. a) Is it OK to mix and match gcc3 and gcc4? b) Should we recompile the whole of R under gcc4? c) On posting to the RHEL 4 list one respondent said not to touch gcc4 with a barge

Chandler/Domagoj, On Sun, 2006-12-10 at 10:53 -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote: > Unless I'm missing something, the problem lies directly with the fact > that you are trying to do a link-stage operation with the GCC > frontend. GCC, by default, probably runs "ld" or another system > linker, which grabs the executable from binutils. This linker hasn't > been modified

I'm having some trouble getting llvm-gcc4 to compile. It's unable to compile darwin-crt3.c. It's mentioning "Complex expression. Absolute segment assumed." but I'm not sure if that's a real error message. Has anyone run into this before? I'm running on a G4 apple 10.4.8, kernel version 8.6.0. I googled around and found a bug with the same error message:

[This is a follow up on gcc3 vs. gcc4 discussion. Background: R benchmark tests ( http://www.sciviews.org/benchmark/index.html ) show a dramatic difference in "Escoufier's method on a 37x37 matrix (mixed)" test when comparing binaries for PowerPC compiled with gcc3 vs gcc4.] On Oct 16, 2006, at 11:29 AM, Ren? J.V. Bertin wrote: > Anyway, it has nothing to do with the G4

On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:25 PM, Kay Sievers <kay at vrfy.org> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 08:06:15PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: >>> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 07:43:34PM +0100, Kay

On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:25 PM, Kay Sievers <kay at vrfy.org> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 08:06:15PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: >>> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 07:43:34PM +0100, Kay

In case people here don't follow the udev mailing list, udev seems to be quasi-dropping klibc support. Well, see the forwarded message below. As I don't agree with the "omg udev is complex! use glibc!" rationale, I want klibc and udev to remain working with each other.... Assuming some minor breakage in the near future, is klibc open to accepting patches for "basic C

On Nov 14, 2006, at 8:30 AM, Tanya M. Lattner wrote: > >>> I assume you have an Mac with an Intel processor. >> >> Yes. Sorry, I forgot to mentioned it in the mailbody. >> >>> Download this: >>> http://llvm.org/releases/1.8/llvm-gcc4-1.8-x86-darwin.tar.gz >> >> I think that is the same tarball I used before. > > Ok. I'm

Reid Spencer wrote: > Chandler/Domagoj, > > On Sun, 2006-12-10 at 10:53 -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote: > >>Unless I'm missing something, the problem lies directly with the fact >>that you are trying to do a link-stage operation with the GCC >>frontend. GCC, by default, probably runs "ld" or another system >>linker, which grabs the executable from

>> I assume you have an Mac with an Intel processor. > > Yes. Sorry, I forgot to mentioned it in the mailbody. > >> Download this: >> http://llvm.org/releases/1.8/llvm-gcc4-1.8-x86-darwin.tar.gz > > I think that is the same tarball I used before. Ok. I'm confused. Do you want llvm-gcc3 or llvm-gcc4? The tarball above is a binary for llvm-gcc4 for Mac x86. You