similar to: [LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 3000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing"

2006 Apr 19
0
[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
On 4/16/06, Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> wrote: > > I've put the pre-release tar balls here: > http://llvm.org/prereleases/1.7/ > The build failed on i686-pc-linux-gnu. llvm[2]: Flexing FileLexer.l llvm[2]: Compiling FileLexer.cpp for Release build /home/rogelio/Desktop/llvm/utils/TableGen/FileLexer.l: In function 'int Filelex()':
2006 Apr 20
0
[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
This came up when trying to compile the Python bindings against llvm 1.7. File include/llvm/Transforms/Scalar.h declares llvm::createPREPass(), which does not seem to be implemented anywhere. Should I report this in llvmbugs? -- Pertti
2006 Apr 20
1
[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
Pertti Kellomäki wrote: > This came up when trying to compile the Python bindings > against llvm 1.7. File include/llvm/Transforms/Scalar.h > declares llvm::createPREPass(), which does not seem to > be implemented anywhere. Should I report this in llvmbugs? Just to clarify myself: this is an issue with the LLVM sources, not with the Python bindings. -- Pertti
2006 Apr 19
1
[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
On 4/19/06, Rogelio Serrano <rogelio.serrano at gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/16/06, Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> wrote: > > > > I've put the pre-release tar balls here: > > http://llvm.org/prereleases/1.7/ > > > > The build failed on i686-pc-linux-gnu. > > llvm[2]: Flexing FileLexer.l > llvm[2]: Compiling FileLexer.cpp for Release build
2006 Apr 19
3
[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
On 4/19/06, Patrick Meredith <pmeredit at uiuc.edu> wrote: > I haven't seen anyone claim x86 linux objdir == srcdir, so I'll test it out. > Missed the 18th,but I'll try to have it done asap. > > > On Apr 18, 2006, at 2:51 PM, Robert L. Bocchino Jr. wrote: > I'll test on Darwin/PPC, precompiled llvmgcc, objdir == srcdir. > > Rob > Sorry for being
2006 Apr 20
2
[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
Hi Pertti, The boost Python are not (yet) part of LLVM so I suppose it would make most sense to try to makes fixes/changes so they would work for 1.7 and then try to get them into LLVM CVS. It would be good in such a case to ask the author of the bindings again if he would allow this, because basicaly I think he has to agree to the LLVM lincense. cheers, Eric On Apr 20, 2006, at 5:08
2006 Apr 18
3
[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
I'll test on Darwin/PPC, precompiled llvmgcc, objdir == srcdir. Rob On Apr 16, 2006, at 1:42 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Sun, 16 Apr 2006, Tanya Lattner wrote: >> For testing, we would like a mix of people to do x86 and ppc. >> Please send email to the list if you plan to test, what >> architecture, and if you will use the llvm-gcc binary or compile >> it
2006 Apr 19
0
[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
I haven't seen anyone claim x86 linux objdir == srcdir, so I'll test it out. Missed the 18th,but I'll try to have it done asap. On Apr 18, 2006, at 2:51 PM, Robert L. Bocchino Jr. wrote: > I'll test on Darwin/PPC, precompiled llvmgcc, objdir == srcdir. > > Rob > > On Apr 16, 2006, at 1:42 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > >> On Sun, 16 Apr 2006, Tanya Lattner
2006 Apr 16
0
[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
On Sun, 16 Apr 2006, Tanya Lattner wrote: > For testing, we would like a mix of people to do x86 and ppc. Please send > email to the list if you plan to test, what architecture, and if you will use > the llvm-gcc binary or compile it yourself. That way, I know who to expect > results from. I will test on Darwin/PPC, I'll try the precompiled llvmgcc, objdir != srcdir. -Chris
2006 Apr 16
0
[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
Hi Tanya, Attached are the "make check" results from my machine Darwin Bill-Wendlings-Computer.local 8.6.0 Darwin Kernel Version 8.6.0: Tue Mar 7 16:58:48 PST 2006; root:xnu-792.6.70.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc I'll have the llvm-test results available later. -bw -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: check.out Type:
2003 Jul 25
1
[LLVMdev] i think this is a bug
Hi, The attached code produces errors (as it should) with the command llvmgcc -c -S timeLLVMfft.c but it also creates output in the file timeLLVMfft.s. Maybe this is the intended behavior for llvmgcc, but it seems unconventional to me... - Nick -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: timeLLVMfft.c.tgz Type: application/octet-stream Size: 829
2007 May 17
3
[LLVMdev] 2.0-prerelease build errors
Hi all, I'm building the LLVM 2.0 pre-release on a brand new FreeBSD 6.2 install. Without the bison package installed, the build breaks: $ tar zxf llvm-2.0.tar.gz $ mkdir objdir $ cd objdir $ ../llvm-2.0/configure $ gmake [...] gmake[2]: Entering directory `/usr/home/emil/objdir/utils/TableGen' llvm[2]: Compiling AsmWriterEmitter.cpp for Release build llvm[2]: Compiling
2007 May 17
0
[LLVMdev] 2.0-prerelease build errors
> llvm[2]: Flexing FileLexer.l > llvm[2]: Bison of FileParser.y SKIPPED -- bison not found > llvm[2]: Compiling FileLexer.cpp for Release build > /usr/home/emil/llvm-2.0/utils/TableGen/FileLexer.l:34:24: FileParser.h: No such file or directory > > Is this a packaging issue where FileParser.h was omitted > from the tarball, or does LLVM *need* bison in order to build? No,
2006 Aug 02
1
[LLVMdev] 1.8 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
I've put the pre-release tar balls here: http://llvm.org/prereleases/1.8/ I'm asking for help to test this release and to review documentation. If anyone can spare some time to help out, I would really appreciate it. The more people that test, the better this release will be. Quick Summary of Important Dates: August 7th - All documentation reviewed and changes checked in. August 8th -
2007 Sep 17
3
[LLVMdev] 2.1 Pre-Release Available (testers needed)
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007, Emil Mikulic wrote: >> The 2.1 pre-release (version 1) is available for testing: >> http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.1/version1/ > > I suspect the utils/TableGen/FileParser.h.cvs in the tarball may be > stale. I tried building LLVM without bison installed and got: Can you try it again without bison with these files:
2006 Apr 19
0
[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
I have flex version 2.5.31, gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-13), and am obviously using Debian. I would assume that the reason your build fails and mine succeeds in due to one (or more) of those things being different ;-) On Apr 19, 2006, at 2:19 AM, Rogelio Serrano wrote: > On 4/19/06, Patrick Meredith <pmeredit at uiuc.edu> wrote: >> I haven't seen anyone claim x86
2009 Jun 17
1
[LLVMdev] Configure problem of llvm2.5 in Mac OS X 10.4.11
Hi, I am trying to install llvm 2.5 in my PowerPC machine. I have already installed XCode Tools 2.4.1. I can compile programs using gcc run them. I try to configure llvm 2.5, the configuration aborts with following message: checking build system type... powerpc-apple-darwin8.11.0 checking host system type... powerpc-apple-darwin8.11.0 checking target system type... powerpc-apple-darwin8.11.0
2007 Sep 15
22
[LLVMdev] 2.1 Pre-Release Available (testers needed)
LLVMers, The 2.1 pre-release (version 1) is available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.1/version1/ I'm looking for members of the LLVM community to test the 2.1 release. There are 2 ways you can help: 1) Download llvm-2.1, llvm-test-2.1, and the appropriate llvm-gcc4.0 binary. Run "make check" and the full llvm-test suite (make TEST=nightly report). 2) Download
2006 Apr 16
1
[LLVMdev] 1.7 Pre-Release Ready for Testing
Are us on Mac OSX or GNU Darwin without apple OS... I am trying to get it going on OpenBSD 3.8/3.9 latest but seems that the compiler boffs on this system... Should I send the configure output-- could anybody maybe have a hint about why its blowing up...? regards, Joseph Altea Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: Hi Tanya, Attached are the "make check" results from
2004 Oct 23
1
[LLVMdev] UPDATE: Makefile.rules Changes (IMPORTANT)
If you're on the new Makefile system, you will want to update your Makefile.rules. The patch below provides some important fixes for parallel builds and dependencies. It also adds some new features like the -local targets. For example, you can now build "all-local" to build the local directory without recursing into subdirectories. See the comments below for details of the change.