similar to: [LLVMdev] Status of LLVM-GCC 4.2?

Am Samstag, den 22.03.2008, 09:45 -0500 schrieb Andrew Lenharth: > officially support for llvm-gcc4.0 has been dropped. > unofficially I still keep llvm-gcc4.0 compiling because I need it for > some stuff. But this will only last until I can use 4.2. OK, that's a clear roadmap. Maybe the docs should be updated to reflect this status? They still present 4.0 as if it were the default

officially support for llvm-gcc4.0 has been dropped. unofficially I still keep llvm-gcc4.0 compiling because I need it for some stuff. But this will only last until I can use 4.2. Andrew On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 5:00 AM, Joachim Durchholz <jo at durchholz.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm wondering what the comparative status of llvm-gcc4.0 vs. llvm-gcc4.2 > is. Can anybody

On Mar 22, 2008, at 3:37 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > Am Samstag, den 22.03.2008, 09:45 -0500 schrieb Andrew Lenharth: >> officially support for llvm-gcc4.0 has been dropped. >> unofficially I still keep llvm-gcc4.0 compiling because I need it for >> some stuff. But this will only last until I can use 4.2. > > OK, that's a clear roadmap. > Please do not rely

4.2 is *complete*. Are you looking for performance #? Since llvm-gcc doesn't use any of gcc's optimization and codegen passes it should roughly the same. In fact, that's what we have been seeing. We have formally deprecated llvm-gcc 4.0 as far as I know. Evan On Mar 22, 2008, at 3:00 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm wondering what the comparative

Hi Jo, > I'm wondering what the comparative status of llvm-gcc4.0 vs. llvm-gcc4.2 > is. Can anybody tell? (A URL would be fine, I may have been just too > dumb to find it.) development of llvm-gcc-4.0 has stopped: only 4.2 is being worked on. The version of 4.2 in the last LLVM release was already mostly superior to 4.0 IMHO. Ciao, Duncan.

Am Samstag, den 22.03.2008, 18:49 +0100 schrieb Duncan Sands: > development of llvm-gcc-4.0 has stopped: only 4.2 is being worked on. > The version of 4.2 in the last LLVM release was already mostly superior > to 4.0 IMHO. So the recommendation would be to use 4.2 for all uses, yes? (Bootstrapping LLVM itself, compiling C/C++ software, whatever.) Regards, Jo

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

Am Samstag, den 08.03.2008, 14:02 -0800 schrieb Tanya Lattner: > - ability to check out llvm-gcc or update llvm-gcc and build it before > running tests. In addition to using a prebuilt binary. Does it need a prebuilt binary? I have been suspecting so since it has been failing with BUILD ERROR for me. I just haven't found the time to verify that yet. I have yet to try building

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

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

Am Samstag, den 08.03.2008, 14:02 -0800 schrieb Tanya Lattner: > - ability to check out llvm-gcc or update llvm-gcc and build it before > running tests. This seems to be a bit more complicated than I thought. There are variations in the build process depending on whether it's a Darwin system or not, installed gcc version, and presence or absence of multilib extensions. I'm not

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 10:07 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 30.03.2008, 12:23 -0400 schrieb Daniel Berlin: >> To clarify, >> >> configure --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu >> --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu >> >> I do this all the time on my 4 core amd64 box and it works fine. > > There must be some other difference, as

Hi all, I managed to navigate around all those issues with environment variables and such. llvm itself now builds and checks just fine, but I can't get llvm-gcc to compile. Trying to 'make' from .../gcc gives me: ./xgcc -B./ -B/home/jo/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -isystem /home/jo/i686-pc-linux-gnu/include -isystem /home/jo/i686-pc-linux-gnu/sys-include -L/home/jo/llvm-gcc-wrk/gcc/../ld

> I've run the test last night to see how long it takes, and I can > afford to cronjob it for the night. Great! > I didn't quite realize it would automatically send the report, but > it did [1] and there are a few test failure from the > Frontend{C,C++} directories. I suppose this is because I have > llvm-gcc4.0 2.1 installed, which might need to be upgraded. Is >

I've been tossing around some ideas about high-level backends. Say, have LLVM emit Perl code. Sounds whacky but isn't. It's good for the first bootstrapping phase in environments where you don't have a C compiler, where you don't have a cross-compiled binary for download, but you can execute Perl. It also makes a great inspect-the-sources-with-an-editor stage for aspiring

Hi all, I just forgot to ./configure with CC=gcc-4.2 CXX=g++-4.2, getting the (broken-for-LLVM) gcc-4.1 as a compiler. The error message that I got was this: make[1]: Entering directory `/home/jo/llvm-wrk/lib/VMCore' make[1]: *** No rule to make target `/home/jo/llvm-wrk/Release/bin/tblgen', needed by `/home/jo/llvm-wrk/lib/VMCore/Release/Intrinsics.gen.tmp'. Stop.

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 01.11.2011 05:59, schrieb Marc J. Driftmeyer: > Then this complaint about build times and extra CPU cycles when you're > living in a world of systems soon to average 16GB of RAM, 4-12 cores and > GPUs that would make any old Animator dream back in the '90s really > makes me laugh. Not disagreeing about the rest, but here I have to. In today's projects, full rebuilds

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