similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm-gcc4_2

hi! because i read that other people may be interested in llvm-gcc4_2 in the google-soc thread, here is the status of my work: i merged llvm-gcc and the current gcc4_2. this is the patch from official gcc4_2 to my llvm-gcc4_2: http://geldspeicher.entenhausen.at/dl/gcc-4_2_to_llvm.patch.gz comments: + i left out most APPLE LOCAL* marked regions of llvm-gcc4 which were not concerning llvm

> > i was working on an llvm-gcc4_2 version, which i used as a starting-point for > > a fixed-point c-datatype implementation. > > i read that the svn repos is up now, and so i remembered the following lines: > > > >> On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Peter Wiedermann wrote: > >>> i fixed some major bugs in the llvm-gcc4_2 patch since my last post. >

hi! i fixed some major bugs in the llvm-gcc4_2 patch since my last post. this brings me to an interesting question: what are your criteria to use my patch for further development? at the moment i use the llvm-test1.9 suite for testing, because the actual llvm-test trunk in the repository seems to be broken. in my configuration the official llvm-gcc4 does not run completely error free against

On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Peter Wiedermann wrote: > ok, thats fine to me. > i think the worst part of the work is done. wow, you look quite far along. >> Hrm, that's strange. llvm-test doesn't pass 100% (e.g. some of the EH >> stuff is now working yet), but it should ahve basic functionality. What >> is broken? >> > > major error causes: > > the

> > > On Jul 3, 2007, at 8:04 AM, Peter Wiedermann wrote: > > > yes. > > for a detailed llvm-gcc4 to llvm-gcc4.2 failure comparison see: > > > > http://geldspeicher.entenhausen.at/dl/llvm-gcc4_2_stat.ps.gz > > or > > http://geldspeicher.entenhausen.at/dl/llvm-gcc4_2_stat.pdf > > You have lots of failures, even for llvm-gcc-4.0. Which

hi! i was working on an llvm-gcc4_2 version, which i used as a starting-point for a fixed-point c-datatype implementation. i read that the svn repos is up now, and so i remembered the following lines: > On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Peter Wiedermann wrote: > > i fixed some major bugs in the llvm-gcc4_2 patch since my last post. > > this brings me to an interesting question: > >

I am working on an experimental target and trying to make sure that the load offset field is used to the best way. There appears to be some control over the architecture's offset range and whether the offset is too large and needs to be lowered/converted into a separate sequence of operations in DAGSelection? Can someone point me to what might be the case? For example, the difference between

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Reid Spencer wrote: > On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 23:47 -0800, Chris Lattner wrote: > >> Very nice. Reid/Anton, do you guys have an idea when the svn server will >> be available? > > Mid April. > > The SVN server is getting installed tomorrow. Anton and I are still > testing the automated conversion script (almost there). > > We will probably

On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 23:47 -0800, Chris Lattner wrote: > Very nice. Reid/Anton, do you guys have an idea when the svn server will > be available? Mid April. The SVN server is getting installed tomorrow. Anton and I are still testing the automated conversion script (almost there). We will probably make a beta svn server available (via my machine) for anyone that wants a preview. One

Hello List Samba Version :3.0.2 (Debian Woody) Kernel Verion :2.4.27 I had to reinstall a Windows XP-Professional-Box at work. When I got to the point where you add the box to the domain, it wouldn't let me to. (I also disabled the settings in secpol.msc) I deleted the entry in smbpasswd using smbpasswd -x -m trick$, added it new and still the same problem. (The UID are right) Out of

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=542 Summary: OpenSSH 3.6.1p1 - sftp exit codes and improved logging for scripting Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: -current Platform: Sparc OS/Version: Solaris Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: sftp AssignedTo:

Hi, I read at least 100 different documentations during the last week and didn't get it. So I decided to ask the list for help :) Unfortunately we have to move to a Windows 2008 Server ADS in our company as this is required for some other projects. But we want to keep our nice 5+ samba-server providing fast 50TB+ of storage. So we have to find a way to nicely integrate the storage with the

On 26/10/2015 10:56, Andrey Smetanin wrote: > Hyper-V SynIC is a Hyper-V synthetic interrupt controller. > > The test runs on every vCPU and performs the following steps: > * read from all Hyper-V SynIC MSR's > * setup Hyper-V SynIC evt/msg pages > * setup SINT's routing > * inject SINT's into destination vCPU by 'hyperv-synic-test-device' > * wait for

Hyper-V SynIC is a Hyper-V synthetic interrupt controller. The test runs on every vCPU and performs the following steps: * read from all Hyper-V SynIC MSR's * setup Hyper-V SynIC evt/msg pages * setup SINT's routing * inject SINT's into destination vCPU by 'hyperv-synic-test-device' * wait for SINT's isr's completion * clear Hyper-V SynIC evt/msg pages and destroy

Hyper-V SynIC is a Hyper-V synthetic interrupt controller. The test runs on every vCPU and performs the following steps: * read from all Hyper-V SynIC MSR's * setup Hyper-V SynIC evt/msg pages * setup SINT's routing * inject SINT's into destination vCPU by 'hyperv-synic-test-device' * wait for SINT's isr's completion * clear Hyper-V SynIC evt/msg pages and destroy

Hi I updated samba today to 3.0.5. Printing stopped working. The log says: [2004/08/02 14:28:57, 0] printing/print_cups.c:cups_printer_fn(108) Unable to connect to CUPS server localhost - Verbindungsaufbau abgelehnt I'm using lprng not cups. Is samba ignoring printing = lprng? I tested lpr it still works as usual. Is there anything else I should check? Thanks. Best, Hans

hello > > in the first step, we either have to backport the changes in the gcc > > frontend or port llvm-gcc to a more recent version (with the 4.2 > > release on its way, this might be a good candidate). it appears, > > resources are better spent for latter. are there major concerns > > speaking against this approach? does anybody have a rough estimate of > >

The Wine development release 1.1.8 is now available. What's new in this release (see below for details): - Substantial parts of inetcomm implemented (for Outlook). - Still better crypt32 support. - Memory management improvements. - Theming support for buttons. - Various bug fixes. The source is available from the following locations:

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Vladimir Merzliakov wrote: > Is it ok sending this results for FreeBSD5.1 at daily/weekly based to this > mail list? A better list for it would be the llvmbugs list for now. I beginning to think that we need a new test results mailing list. We have 3 instances of the nightly tester going now (x86/linux, sparc, ppc) and may have more in the future. The nightly tester

Is it ok sending this results for FreeBSD5.1 at daily/weekly based to this mail list? Now results. Big improvement in llvm tests results from last test result sended. New regressions: Regression.Assembler.ConstantExprFold : FAIL , expected PASS Regression.CodeGen.Generic.2004-04-09-SameValueCoalescing: FAIL , expected PASS Regression.Transforms.PRE.basictest : FAIL