similar to: [LLVMdev] warning if you're building from CVS

On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Robert L. Bocchino Jr. wrote: > I did a utils/cvsupdate, and there are no conflicts. srcdir != objdir. This > is on persephone. > > Are you not getting this error? Perhaps I should check out a fresh tree and > try to compile it? Nope, I don't think anyone else is getting this error. If you could try a fresh build that would be great, I'll fire

OK, when I copy $(SRCDIR)/include/llvm/Intrinsics.gen to $(OBJDIR)/ include/llvm/ by hand after building (and failing) once, the build succeeds. This is definitely a makefile bug. Rob On Apr 7, 2006, at 11:40 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Robert L. Bocchino Jr. wrote: >> I just updated from CVS, and after doing a clean rebuild I get >> this error: > >

On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Robert L. Bocchino Jr. wrote: > I just updated from CVS, and after doing a clean rebuild I get this error: Are you sure that no conflicts prevented updating from going smoothly? How are you building (srcdir ==/!= objdir)? -Chris > /Users/bocchino/llvm-checkin/src/include/llvm/IntrinsicInst.h: In static > member function 'static bool

I did a utils/cvsupdate, and there are no conflicts. srcdir != objdir. This is on persephone. Are you not getting this error? Perhaps I should check out a fresh tree and try to compile it? Rob On Apr 7, 2006, at 11:40 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Robert L. Bocchino Jr. wrote: >> I just updated from CVS, and after doing a clean rebuild I get >> this

On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, BGB wrote: > even more interestingly: if the same compiler were also used for static > compilation, it could be used as a special feature to make such dynamic > movability available even for statically compiled and linked code (as > is, in my case, parts of the app which are statically compiled and > linked, can't currently be relinked...). LLVM handles

On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Reid Spencer wrote: > Why not put all this into a pre-commit filter in CVS and be done with > it? We'd never be bothered with it again as it would never be committed > again. I'd rather not have CVS commit scripts mucking with the code. If you want to have the nightly tester whine about source code with spaces at the end of lines (like it whines about

I'm guessing the problem occurred because I hadn't updated in a while (maybe a couple of weeks?) and I had an old Intrinsics.gen file hanging around in my source directory that was getting picked up by the makefile for some reason. This is a bug, but maybe it's harmless because there's a onetime workaround (delete the file by hand) and it won't be a problem for

On Sun, 30 Apr 2006, Fernando Magno Quintao Pereira wrote: > I am trying to use LLVM to implement one register allocation > algorithm. I think I understand the code, and I've started my > implementation. But I am having a problem, mostly due to my ignorance of > C++. I am basically modifying the code of > llvm/lib/CodeGen/RegAllocLocal.cpp. But if I type 'gmake'

I've done several CVS head builds today .. no problems on Linux. Reid. On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 11:53 -0500, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Robert L. Bocchino Jr. wrote: > > > I did a utils/cvsupdate, and there are no conflicts. srcdir != objdir. This > > is on persephone. > > > > Are you not getting this error? Perhaps I should check out a fresh

Due to the recent discovery of a CVS remote root exploit, our CVS server is currently being blocked by our network gateway (our server is patched, it's just that not all of the rest in the building are). I just was quoted these times for it to be fixed: 25% chance by 5:00pm today. 75% chance by 5:00pm on Tuesday. 100% chance by Thursday. If anyone needs a tarball or something in the

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > Hi, > > Attempting to use cvs with LLVM is producing the following: > > bash-2.05b$ cvs status > cvs [status aborted]: connect to > llvm-cvs.cs.uiuc.edu(128.174.245.58):2401 failed: Connection refused > > I think this has happened before and the root cause was a stuck xinetd > process on the cvs server. I kicked it, try

On Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Jakob Praher wrote: > I have used LLVM extensively over the last 2 years. > I have realized a so called change framework that based on the LLVM > framework. I am just now getting a chance to read through your thesis. It looks like excellent work. Do you mind if we add it to llvm.org/pubs ? -Chris > Basically it is a framework that augments the JIT to

----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Lattner" <sabre at nondot.org> To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 11:30 AM Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] me being stupid: me vs the llvm codebase... > On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, BGB wrote: >> even more interestingly: if the same compiler were also used for static

On Mon, 16 May 2005, Alexander Friedman wrote: > On May 16, Chris Lattner wrote: >> I'm concerned that this leaks the buffer created for the file, can you >> verify that it doesn't? > > I can verify that the functionality doesn't change. If the buffer was > leaked before, it'll be leaked now. > > However, in 'Lexer.l', you have the following

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Chris" == Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> writes: >>> FWIW I actually did this work twice, once for libjit and once for >>> LLVM. I'm happy to provide a comparison, from a jit-writing >>> perspective, if you're interested. > > Chris> Given your experience with both,

On Thu, 20 Apr 2006, [UTF-8] Rafael Esp?ndola wrote: > I am trying to bootstrap the just released gcc 4.0.1 and the cvs head llvm. > > I was able to build the llvm tools without a problem. > gcc has a small problem (from the apple branch IIRC): libojc is built > unconditionally, so objc must be in the --enable-languages option for > the build to be successful. > > Building

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Reid Spencer wrote: > In buildling XPS using LLVM's makefile system, I'm finding that there's > a few things lacking in our support for LLVM-based projects. The items > below should help but may require changes to project makefiles. I > thought I'd check before just going and doing it. ok. > 1. Various autoconf generated variables (e.g.

On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Vladimir A. Merzliakov wrote: > I have some problems with build current CVS version LLVM using GCC 4.1.0 (GCC > CVS mainline version). Thanks! > 1) Build terminate with error: > > llvm[3]: Compiling SparcV8CodeEmitter.cpp for Debug build > /usr/home/wanderer/pkg/build/llvm/obj/lib/Target/SparcV8/SparcV8GenCodeEmitter.inc:11: > error: definition of

oh, ok. actually, I had partly considered this approach at one point, but opted with the form I did instead (in large part because it does not involve such a tweak, or dependency on the previous location). of course, as noted, due to the possibility of function pointers, this is a little risky. I had not considered this issue previously, but it is definitely worth consideration... I guess the

On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Reid Spencer wrote: > We should probably review this decision at least once a year. If the basis > for not moving to svn is that "cvs is the standard", that situation is likely > to change. Many organizations are now using svn. It is rapidly becoming "the > new standard". At some point it doesn't make sense for us to continue with >