similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM-GCC Source Updated?

The llvm-gcc source can be download from: http://jolt-lang.org/llvm-gcc.tar.bz2 31mb ~7 minute download http://jolt-lang.org/llvm-gcc.tar.gz 40mb ~8.5 minute download Download times assume you are the only person downloading. Please download the bz2 version if possible. I currently have no unexpected failures. Bill wrote: > On 5/4/07, Anton Korobeynikov <asl at

On 5/4/07, Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru> wrote: > Hello, Bill. > > > Has anyone gotten the latest/greatest sources from the LLVM-GCC open > > source server lately? > No. It's still at rev 319 (as of 29.04). > Yeesh...Okay, I'm working with Jeff C. to get a copy of the TOT out to people. I'm also pinging the rsync wonks here to see if there's

Hello, Bill. > Has anyone gotten the latest/greatest sources from the LLVM-GCC open > source server lately? No. It's still at rev 319 (as of 29.04). -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.

On Sep 8, 2011, at 5:09 PM, David A. Greene wrote: > Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> writes: > >>> Let's face it, Joe Dragon is pretty much happy with svn and there's an >>> svn-git bridge for the rest of us. > > The svn-git bridge is broken as several people stated before. It is > easier to contribute code via the gateway but it causes

Hi Bill, I committed a fix already as r355743 [1], and it fixes `test2` as well. I believe we should merge this into 8.0. /Eric [1] https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/680e865c313a80b6ec329abde61e1f0c66bdc103 On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 5:46 PM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Eric, > > The attached patch may help matters, though it now fails because

> I am using the latest-and-greatest WINE, by the way. Yes, this is the problem. It only works up to the Wine version I mentioned in the notes. The newest versions won't let it work. > Question is whether this > program is going backwards in some areas. That's a good question. Lately, a lot of stuff in Wine has been losing compatibility; I don't know if that's because

Thanks :-) One last thing. It seems like the patch has a lot of whitespace changes. Could you create the diff with the -b option? -bw On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Rajika Kumarasiri <rajikacc at gmail.com> wrote: > hi Bill, > Thanks for the comments. I'll update the patch according to that. > > -Rajika > > On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Bill Wendling

WPA-2 (WPA Enterprise) fails with the new kernel(s) using ndiswrapper and wpa_supplicant. I haven't tried other authentication modes because that entails changes in the wireless setup which I am loathe to make right now. (It's a Broadcom mini pci card, so I have to use ndiswrapper with this Dell laptop. Bummer!). Rebuilding the newest wpa_supplicant rpm from the FC5 source rpm's

Hello LLVMers! It's that time of year for a new release of LLVM! Time sure has flown. It seems like only 4 months ago we released LLVM 3.3. :-) Anyway, here is the current plan of action: * We will branch on Monday, November 18th at 7PM PST (November 19th at 3AM GMT). * This gives us a tentative release date of December 23rd...Just in time for Christmas! :-) I'm scheduling it for the

On Apr 2, 2013, at 2:10 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 11:52:09AM -0700, Bill Wendling wrote: >> On Apr 2, 2013, at 9:51 AM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: >> >> As Chris said, the only thing preventing this is manpower. But if there are people ready and willing to do this, then I don't see it as a Bad

I'm more interested in whether or not there are any projects in the works that fuse the tools together to build a better IDE experience. I forget which presentation it was, but one of the developers (I *think* it was the gentleman that presented something on CLANG at the dev's conference 2008) made a bit of a point by saying that LLVM, unlike GCC has been built from the ground up with

hi Bill, Thanks for the comments. I'll update the patch according to that. -Rajika On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Rajika Kumarasiri <rajikacc at gmail.com> > wrote: > > hello everybody, > > > > I have added few improvements to my patch. Please review the new patch > >

Hi Matthijs, >> I did put in a hack, but it was horrible. It might be a good idea to >> test out Mike's suggestion to see if it's a better way of doing it. > I just tried building llvm-gcc without your hack, and it still works (even > without the fix Mike suggested). > > So, it seems that r54245 can be reverted again? > > I didn't test bootstrap, however,

On Aug 15, 2009, at 5:05 PM, Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > I just tried to compile llvm-gcc against the top of llvm and I ran > into this error: > > /.../llvm/llvm-gcc-build/./prev-gcc/xgcc > -B/.../llvm/llvm-gcc-build/./prev-gcc/ > -B/.../llvm/llvm-gcc-install/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -c > -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -g -O2 -I. > -I/.../llvm/llvm-gcc-4.2/libiberty/../include -W

On Jun 16, 2009, at 1:05 PM, Granville Barnett wrote: > I'm more interested in whether or not there are any projects in the > works that fuse the tools together to build a better IDE experience. > I forget which presentation it was, but one of the developers (I > *think* it was the gentleman that presented something on CLANG at > the dev's conference 2008) made a bit

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:04 AM, Granville Barnett<granvillebarnett at googlemail.com> wrote: > Hi, > I seem to remember that a big point of LLVM being built with tooling support > out of the box was a major thing, however, I've not read anything about any > tools which are actually taking advantage of the foundation LLVM provides. > I'm not a Mac user, but I'd

2009/7/15 Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple.com> > > On Jul 15, 2009, at 4:48 PMPDT, Daniel Dunbar wrote: > > > That depends on what you call a false positive. The public buildbot > > regularly fails because of mailing Frontend tests, and I have had > > continues failures of some DejaGNU tests for a long time on some > > builders. Its not a false positive per

On 11/28/19 12:12 PM, George Dunlap wrote: > Hey all, > > This mail has been a long time in coming, but with the upcoming > expiration of security support for Xen 4.8, it's time to start thinking > about what our update policy will be for the Xen packages in general. > > Citrix is committed to officially supporting one Xen version at a time > through the CentOS Virt

On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Rajika Kumarasiri <rajikacc at gmail.com> wrote: > hello everybody, > > I have added few improvements to my patch. Please review the new patch > directly. > Thanks! > Hi Rajika, A few stylistic comments. I'll let others comment on the algorithm for now: if ($VERBOSE) { print "( time -p $SVNCMD/llvm/trunk llvm; cd

On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Nick Lewycky<nlewycky at google.com> wrote: > 2009/7/15 Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple.com> >> >> On Jul 15, 2009, at 4:48 PMPDT, Daniel Dunbar wrote: >> >> > That depends on what you call a false positive. The public buildbot >> > regularly fails because of mailing Frontend tests, and I have had >> >