similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm/test: suffix or operands invalid for `push'

I do not know the configury stuff well enough to answer this, can someone else help? On Feb 28, 2008, at 1:55 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 27.02.2008, 14:31 -0800 schrieb Dale Johannesen: >> On Feb 27, 2008, at 2:12 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: >>> All error messages refer to one of the following four >>> instructions: >>> pushl %ebp

>>> >>> Those are valid instructions in every x86-32 assembler I'm aware of. >>> Perhaps it needs a switch to put it in 32-bit mode? >> >> Yes, I have been able to confirm that's what's happening behind the >> scene. The switch would be --32, however after that, ld will try to >> link >> the 64-bit versions of libc and the C

Hi all, I found enough to explain the behaviour that I encountered. If I'm correct, the bugs are just in the dejagnu-based test machinery, not in LLVM itself. There seem to be two issues: Issue 1 is that the CC, CFLAGS, CXX, and CXXFLAGS settings are not reflected in the site.exp file. I had CC=gcc-4.2 CFLAGS="-m32 -Wl,-melf_i386" CXX=g++-4.2 CXXFLAGS=$CFLAGS

On Feb 27, 2008, at 2:12 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > Some additional info: > > I just found the .s files mentioned in the error message, and checked > them. All error messages refer to one of the following four > instructions: > pushl %ebp > pushl %esi > popl %ebp > popl %esi > It's always the same error, "suffix or operands invalid for >

Am Mittwoch, den 27.02.2008, 14:31 -0800 schrieb Dale Johannesen: > On Feb 27, 2008, at 2:12 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > All error messages refer to one of the following four > > instructions: > > pushl %ebp > > pushl %esi > > popl %ebp > > popl %esi > > It's always the same error, "suffix or operands invalid for > >

On Mar 3, 2008, at 2:49 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > Hi all, > > I found enough to explain the behaviour that I encountered. If I'm > correct, the bugs are just in the dejagnu-based test machinery, not in > LLVM itself. Yep, I believe that. I haven't been following the whole thread very closely, what specific tests are affected here? Before making any significant and

Am Mittwoch, den 05.03.2008, 23:03 -0800 schrieb Chris Lattner: > On Mar 3, 2008, at 2:49 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I found enough to explain the behaviour that I encountered. If I'm > > correct, the bugs are just in the dejagnu-based test machinery, not in > > LLVM itself. > > Yep, I believe that. I haven't been

Am Freitag, den 29.02.2008, 18:15 -0800 schrieb Eric Christopher: > Is this configuring llvm or llvm-gcc? This is inside the llvm-2.2 directory. > Seems to work just fine for > configure; make; make check with llvm. Trying "make check" from the llvm directory instead of "make" from llvm/test... doesn't work. Retrying from scratch, here's the transcript:

> # Configure & install > $ cd llvm-2.2 > # I'm trying the --build option, too. > $ ./configure --prefix=$HOME CC=gcc-4.2 CXX=g++-4.2 \ > --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu \ > --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu This is probably the problem. It sounds like you have llvm-gcc building for x86-64 (so the compiler defaults to emitting x86-64 code) but your

Am Samstag, den 01.03.2008, 10:57 -0800 schrieb Chris Lattner: > > # Configure & install > > $ cd llvm-2.2 > > # I'm trying the --build option, too. > > $ ./configure --prefix=$HOME CC=gcc-4.2 CXX=g++-4.2 \ > > --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu \ > > --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu > > This is probably the problem. It sounds like

Am Freitag, den 29.02.2008, 15:37 -0800 schrieb Eric Christopher: > Aaah. Try: > > .../configure --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu > > and see if that works. If it doesn't it may need some more configure > love, but it might happen. Good to read that! I was slowly approaching despair. Seems to make a *far* slower compile though. Or it's compiling

Hi all, while writing a testcase thate needed to do a grep containg {, I found that the DejaGNU test framework didn't handle those very well. It's a bit of a fuss to escape accolades properly, but most of all the framework seemed to silently ignore errors in the escaping (and just not run the command then). See [1]. Fixing the framework resulted in 80 of the tests failing. I spent the

On Feb 29, 2008, at 4:05 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > Am Freitag, den 29.02.2008, 15:37 -0800 schrieb Eric Christopher: >> Aaah. Try: >> >> .../configure --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu >> >> and see if that works. If it doesn't it may need some more configure >> love, but it might happen. > > Good to read that! I was

Some additional info: I just found the .s files mentioned in the error message, and checked them. All error messages refer to one of the following four instructions: pushl %ebp pushl %esi popl %ebp popl %esi It's always the same error, "suffix or operands invalid for `push'" (resp `pop'). There are no other push or pop instructions in any .s file.

Hi, I thought I'd set up a nightly tester and ran across the following issues: 1) Checkout is done using https, which causes the following message: Error validating server certificate for 'https://llvm.org:443': - The certificate is not issued by a trusted authority. Use the fingerprint to validate the certificate manually! Certificate information: - Hostname: llvm.org -

Am Montag, den 31.03.2008, 00:02 -0700 schrieb Tanya Lattner: > On Mar 30, 2008, at 11:22 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > > Am Sonntag, den 30.03.2008, 15:45 -0700 schrieb Tanya Lattner: > >> On Mar 30, 2008, at 12:39 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > >> > >>> OK, I now have > >>> > >>> LLVM_VERSION_INFO=kurier-bootstrap

Am Sonntag, den 30.03.2008, 15:45 -0700 schrieb Tanya Lattner: > On Mar 30, 2008, at 12:39 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > > > > Am Sonntag, den 30.03.2008, 10:28 -0700 schrieb Tanya Lattner: > >> On Mar 30, 2008, at 10:07 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > >>> Look at how $LLVM_CONFIGURE is built, the final value is > >>> > >>>

On Mar 30, 2008, at 11:22 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 30.03.2008, 15:45 -0700 schrieb Tanya Lattner: >> On Mar 30, 2008, at 12:39 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: >> >>> >>> Am Sonntag, den 30.03.2008, 10:28 -0700 schrieb Tanya Lattner: >>>> On Mar 30, 2008, at 10:07 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: >>>>> Look at how

On Mar 30, 2008, at 12:39 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 30.03.2008, 10:28 -0700 schrieb Tanya Lattner: >> On Mar 30, 2008, at 10:07 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: >>> Look at how $LLVM_CONFIGURE is built, the final value is >>> >>> --prefix=/home/jo --enable-optimized --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu >>> --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu

Am Sonntag, den 30.03.2008, 10:28 -0700 schrieb Tanya Lattner: > On Mar 30, 2008, at 10:07 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > Look at how $LLVM_CONFIGURE is built, the final value is > > > > --prefix=/home/jo --enable-optimized --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu > > --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu" > > > > This looks likes its missing some