similar to: [LLVMdev] Dropping support for llvm-gcc3

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

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006, Domagoj Babic wrote: > These should add xIDs for several passes. Please let me know if there're > any problems with the code. I'm a very novice C++ and LLVM programmer, > so please bear with me. The patches look great, applied: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20060501/034450.html

Hi Erick, On Thu, 2006-12-07 at 23:31 -0800, Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > Hello, > > I'm updating the macports build of llvm, and I'm running into an issue > trying to stage llvm into a temporary directory. It builds fine, but > when I try to install it into a temporary location, it insists on > installing into the final location. Okay. > The only reference I saw

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

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 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

I am trying to compile the cfrontend for gcc3, not gcc4. I did ./configure --prefix=/opt/llvmgcc --enable-languages=c,c++ After adding the --enable-languages flag I get "xgcc: installation problem, cannot exec `gccas': No such file or directory" It is true, I don't have gccas in my PATH, nor does the file gccas appear in my cfrontend directory. Is my configuration wrong, yet

First, thanks for testing this! > Here's the results for GNU/Linux, 2.6.18-1.2200.fc5smp (Fedora Core 5) > > HIGH LEVEL COMMENTS > * The llvm-1.9.tar.gz file unpacks to a dir named "llvm". Shouldn't > that be llvm-1.9? We have always labeled the dir just llvm which is fine. If you build llvm it will know its version 1.9. > * LLVM was built in Release mode

Reid Spencer wrote: > Yes, but its a bit verbose. The variables that control this are all > defined in the Makefile.config file. The variables are: > > PROJ_prefix := /proj/llvm/install-1 > PROJ_bindir := /proj/llvm/install-1/bin > PROJ_libdir := /proj/llvm/install-1/lib > PROJ_datadir := /proj/llvm/install-1/share > PROJ_docsdir :=

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 On 8/14/06, Scott Michel <scottm at rushg.aero.org> wrote: > I know that Al Stone has compiled llvm-gcc4 successfully and I can > report the same. The problem I consistently run into is that llvm-gcc > ends up producing native

Hi Erick, On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 19:27 -0800, Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > Reid Spencer wrote: > > Yes, but its a bit verbose. The variables that control this are all > > defined in the Makefile.config file. The variables are: > > > > PROJ_prefix := /proj/llvm/install-1 > > PROJ_bindir := /proj/llvm/install-1/bin > > PROJ_libdir :=

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

[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

I know that Al Stone has compiled llvm-gcc4 successfully and I can report the same. The problem I consistently run into is that llvm-gcc ends up producing native format output; it does not produce bytecode, nor does it invoke gccas or gccld. I'm using the latest svn, and my configure args are: --prefix=/work/scottm/llvm-cfrontend/obj/../i686-pc-linux-gnu \

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

>> 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

Hi Everyone, I'm happy to say that LLVM has made many leaps and bounds since the last update in November. Because we are bumping the major version number with this release, we're letting the release go for twice as long as our planned release schedule (6 months instead of 3). We are currently half way through the LLVM 2.0 development cycle. So far, many important and invasive changes

Hello Hendrik Mon, 07 Aug 2006 14:35:25 -0400 you wrote: > (1) To install llvm, do I really need the llvm version of the gcc > front end? I have no special interest in yet another c/c++ conmpiler. No. This will only need, if you want to turn your C\C++ sources to LLVM bytecode. > (4) The page http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#checkout says > to get the gcc 3.4 source code.

Tanya, Here's the results for GNU/Linux, 2.6.18-1.2200.fc5smp (Fedora Core 5) HIGH LEVEL COMMENTS * The llvm-1.9.tar.gz file unpacks to a dir named "llvm". Shouldn't that be llvm-1.9? * LLVM was built in Release mode in all cases * I don't think this is ready for release. In particular the llvm-gcc4 binary seg faults on FC 5 for most of llvm-test programs. *

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