similar to: [LLVMdev] Repository Layout

On 2007-06-30, at 18:36, Reid Spencer wrote: > I'm finding the current layout a bit frustrating, not to mention > that it breaks all the documentation. [...] I would rather see it > laid out like this: > > trunk/llvm/... > trunk/stacker/... > trunk/java/... > > branches/llvm/... > branches/stacker/... > branches/java/... > >

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Reid Spencer wrote: > I'm finding the current layout a bit frustrating, not to mention that it > breaks all the documentation. We currently have modules laid out like > this: > llvm/trunk/... > llvm/branches/... > llvm/tags/... > stacker/trunk/... > stacker/branches/... > stacker/tags/... > > and similarly for all the other

Hi Gordon, On Sun, 2007-07-01 at 08:22 -0400, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > On 2007-06-30, at 18:36, Reid Spencer wrote: > > > > I'm finding the current layout a bit frustrating, not to mention > > that it breaks all the documentation. [...] I would rather see it > > laid out like this: > > > > > > > > > trunk/llvm/... > >

Reid, On Jun 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, Reid Spencer wrote: > All, > > I'm finding the current layout a bit frustrating, not to mention > that it > breaks all the documentation. We currently have modules laid out like > this: > > llvm/trunk/... > llvm/branches/... > llvm/tags/... > > stacker/trunk/... > stacker/branches/... >

On 10/11/2018 03:27 PM, James Y Knight via llvm-dev wrote: > TLDR: https://github.com/llvm-git-prototype/ exists as a read-only mirror of SVN, and is being updated continuously with a script running on an llvm-project AWS VM. > Hi James, What is the current status of the monorepo, have you resolved all the known issues with the history? Are there any other changes that need to be made

Devang Patel wrote: > Your suggestion makes life difficult for someone who wants to mirror > one subproject. Once, llvm-gcc is using svn at llvm.org, most likely > I will create a local mirror to follow llvm-gcc development. In that > case > it is easier to mirror > > .../llvm-gcc > > then > > ../trunk/llvm-gcc/ > ../branches/llvm-gcc/ >

Well shoot, you beat me to it. :) I've been working on a similar tool but it's not ready yet. Looking forward to trying yours! -David James Y Knight via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > I'm about to post exactly this tool -- I've been testing it on the > CHERI forks of llvm/clang/lld (lots of history and merges and stuff

On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 4:04 PM NAKAMURA Takumi <geek4civic at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, David. > > On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 7:46 AM David Jones via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Hi James, >> >> I've started working with the prototype layout in context of Google's >> internal infrastructure. With deep apologies, I

Hi James, I've started working with the prototype layout in context of Google's internal infrastructure. With deep apologies, I have a (very late, I know) pair of requests that have only recently solidified for me. 1. Could you add annotated tags after the cut point of each release? (I think this would probably be easy.) 2. Could you mark branch/tag operations somehow other than a

Reid Spencer wrote: > On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 20:43 -0800, Wink Saville wrote: > >>> Try passing "-L/opt/llvm-1.6/llvm-gcc/lib/ -lcrtend" to llvm-ld. >>> >> This didn't work for me: >> llvm-ld -o t1.app t1.bc t1.a -L/opt/llvm-1.6/llvm-gcc/lib/ -lcrtend.a >> >> I get two warning's about library 'crtend' missing

> The only thing a monorepo gets you that strictly isn’t possible without > it is the ability to commit to multiple projects in a single commit. > Personally I don’t think that is a big enough justification, but that is > my opinion, not a fact. Okay, I just bumped into r277008, in which commits to llvm, clang, and clang-tools-extra all have the same SVN revision number. I don't

This kind of regression is a fallout of having some code live in separate CVS modules as "projects." It would help to have someone volunteer to maintain each project, which can be as little as making sure it continues to compile or as much as supporting it with answers to questions and bug fixes. Here is the current list of projects: llvm-poolalloc llvm-java (currently unused

> And if it is, then the "only thing a monorepo gets you" isn't something that you need a monorepo to get. This is an *extremely important* point to understand, so let me try to be really clear about the current state of the world and the state of the world under the two "move to git" proposals. Today, all commits ultimately end up in SVN. Our SVN is a effectively a

By the way, I've been using the existing read-only monorepo [1] for a few days now. The intent is to commit via the script I put together [2], although I haven't committed anything other than a testing commit [3]. All I can say is, *wow* is it nice. I hid everything I don't care about using a sparse checkout [4]. Many of my tools (e.g. ctrl-p [5] [6], ycm [7]) suddenly work better

Hi, I get this error: --------------- configure: configuring in projects/Stacker configure: running /bin/sh '/C/projects/src/llvm-2/llvm/projects/Stacker/configure' --prefix=/C/LLVM/tools/ '--prefix=/C/LLVM/tools/' 'CPPFLAGS=-D__MINGW -DLLVM_ON_WIN32=1' --cache-file=/dev/null --srcdir=/C/projects/src/llvm-2/llvm/projects/Stacker configure: error: invalid variable

If I remember correctly, you get the following warning when you configure LLVM: configure:2087: WARNING: Unknown project (Stacker) won't be configured automatically That leads would lead me to believe that you need to run configure inside llvm/projects/Stacker (and inside llvm/projects/Hello) before you run gmake inside of them. I don't know for sure, but perhaps that might fix

Reid, Click on any of these logs and you'll see the same asm parsing issues. It's been going on for much of the week. http://llvm.org/nightlytest/machines/2006-12-29_05:40:12-Build-Log.txt http://llvm.org/nightlytest/machines/2006-12-29_05:40:12-Build-Log.txt llvm[4]: Compiling stacker_rt.ll to stacker_rt.bc for Release build (bytecode)

Hello, I was wondering what happened to the "Stacker" example. The old link to it "http://llvm.org/docs/Stacker.html" is dead. Thanks, Wayne ________________ Wayne Anderson

Hi, > On Sep 7, 2016, at 10:30 AM, dag at cray.com wrote: > > Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > >> Right, we actually have a proposal to take what is in the current SVN >> repo here: http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/ and migrate this to a >> single repository. >> I was not sure if you were referring to this proposal

On Fri, 2003-12-19 at 15:32, Chris Lattner wrote: > This is intentionally not part of the LLVM type-system, because it is > redundant. If you compile a C program that uses a union, for example, the > C front-end will turn it into a type (often a structure) that contains > only one of the element types (usually the largest one, perhaps modified > to have the correct alignment).