similar to: [LLVMdev] Some blogged LLVM experience.

Hi Michael, thanks for trying out LLVM! "The bad news comes with the make test-all results. Less than two minutes into the comprehensive test suite the LLVM-GCC version of Ruby 1.9 dies with the following message: "Illegal instruction (core dumped)". Later it tells me the test failed with "error 132". This is, as you can see, not a very useful message since it's not

On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 09:06 +0100, Duncan Sands wrote: > Does ruby compile ruby code to native instructions and execute them? No. Ruby is an interpreted language. The latest version has a VM that it targets -- YARV -- but it still does not compile to native like, say, a JIT would. > Otherwise it probably means that llvm-gcc miscompiled something. This is what I'm guessing at

I'm trying to get LLVM1.9 working on my Ubuntu 6.10 system. The LLVM version in the repositories is 1.7 and I've never managed to get it successfully working because whoever packaged it thought it would be fun to rename everything. This means I can't use it to build 1.9 and I've therefore decided to try bootstrapping a 1.9 build. Yes, I've looked at the docs where it said

I'm losing my sanity, so I thought I'd try and generate an LLVM target for the Glasgow Haskell Compiler (GHC). In talking to some of the people in the GHC mailing list some issues have come up that I can't find a ready answer to. (Others came up that I could, so I don't feel quite as stupid or helpless as I could.) 1. Is there any way to hint that a global pointer variable

Hi Michael, On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 10:24 +0800, Michael T. Richter wrote: > I'm trying to get LLVM1.9 working on my Ubuntu 6.10 system. The LLVM > version in the repositories is 1.7 and I've never managed to get it > successfully working because whoever packaged it thought it would be > fun to rename everything. This means I can't use it to build 1.9 and > I've

Hi Michael, On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 13:13 +0800, Michael T. Richter wrote: > On Tue, 2007-16-01 at 02:50 +0000, Reid Spencer wrote: > > > The build instructions provided tell me to build llvm-gcc first from > > > the source. > > > The source for that tells me to build llvm first from the source. I'm > > > not sure where to go from this point. >

On Tue, 2007-16-01 at 02:50 +0000, Reid Spencer wrote: > > The build instructions provided tell me to build llvm-gcc first from > > the source. > > The source for that tells me to build llvm first from the source. I'm > > not sure where to go from this point. > You should build llvm first, then llvm-gcc. When I build LLVM first, however, I get told that it

Thanks for your replies. This is indeed a helpful mailing list. I made some more researches about the licensing issue and this is what I discovered: - from FSF it seems that packaging together a GPL application and a commercial one it is a corner case of licensing. Here is what they say: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation

I'm getting behaviour I don't understand from my attempt to build the GCC front end under Ubuntu Edgy. Everything seems to work fine until I hit this: stage1/xgcc -Bstage1/ -B/home/michael/software/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -c -O2 -g -fomit-frame-pointer -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -pedantic

I wrote: > The Solution: Make LLVM usable as a DLL or SLL in Windoze, > capable of generating a finished ready-to-execute .EXE or > .DLL file, without requiring that MinGW or Cygwin be > installed first. Michael T. Richter replied: > You will be welcomed with open arms by the LLVM community > when you write this. I look forward to your announcement > with bated breath.

On May 13, 2008, at 10:04 PM, Razvan Aciu wrote: > Thanks for your replies. This is indeed a helpful mailing list. I > made some > more researches about the licensing issue and this is what I > discovered: > For now, I think for a commercial developer who wants to create a > complete > compiler toolchain using llvm, trying to package its compiler with > GCC is a

On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 16:30 +1000, kr512 wrote: > Michael T. Richter wrote: > > Apparently the APIs in the LLVM docs missed your > > attention. They're sneaky that way because, you know, > > they just form the bulk of available documentation. > I began my original message saying that I was providing > "constructive criticism". That means I want to

"Razvan Aciu" <admin at kam.ro> writes: [snip] > The problem is with the gcc and binutils licence. This is GPL and [snip] I agree with Owen Anderson on this one (altough IANAL, etc). [snip] > In that respect, if someone can adapt the MASM templates to produce > NASM directives (it is the only thing that needs to be changed), these > updates will be more than

Hi there LLVM is a great idea, congratulations. Do you mind if I give you a little bit of constructive criticism from the point of view of a developer who would like to use LLVM as a back-end? I will write this email from the point of view of MS Windows, but the same applies to MacOS and Linux. LLVM is difficult/awkward to use in a real-world environment/situation. To solve this problem,

me22.ca wrote: > You said that if I have to install GCC, you might as well > just use it for everything. That statement very clearly > doesn't apply anymore, since it's binutils that's the > dependency. Or if you still stand by it, it means that > you consider GCC to also be "incomplete". How do I get the necessary binutils on Windoze? Install MinGW or

Michael T. Richter wrote: > Apparently the APIs in the LLVM docs missed your > attention. They're sneaky that way because, you know, > they just form the bulk of available documentation. I began my original message saying that I was providing "constructive criticism". That means I want to HELP if I can. Your sarcastic attitude is unprofessional. > The

I have a Typo blog, everything works great locally as always. When I push it up to my shared host, which supports typo and has all requirements, I am getting the 500 error from my htaccess file. I believe that the issue is from redirects, but I am new to RoR and not too familiar with the htaccess file. Can anyone tell me how I would need to have it set up if my blog is using the symlink I set up

Hi, I think that the wu-ftp style chroot /./ should be a configurable option. In our servers we have some home directories in /chroot-web/./username (where web users can upload their web sites in a chrooted environment) and all imap mail in /mail-disk/username. We are planning a dovecot migration from our modified version of uw-imap and we noticed that the chroot in /chroot-web/ can't be

Hello, I downloaded llvm-gcc4.2-2.2.source.tar.gz and followed instructions in README.LLVM, I used this to configure it: ../configure --prefix=/opt/llvm --enable-threads --disable-nls --enable-languages=c,c++ --enable-sjlj-exceptions --enable-llvm=/home/kashyapa/llvm-2.2 --program-prefix=llvm- --disable-bootstrap I have already installed llvm-2.2 in /opt/llvm. The compilation goes thru

Jon Harrop wrote: > Can you explain why you would like to generate DLLs on the > customer's computer rather than using LLVM as a JIT > compiler? Customers/clients unhappy with the inefficiency, extra CPU and RAM usage, and performance penalty of JIT. They require a faster, more efficient solution. The solution is to fully compile programs to native code at the time of