similar to: [LLVMdev] VS build is broken again

I too have done some work on an alternative build system for llvm. It is based on boost.build. Of course, it's quite a large project and I'm not ready to contribute the work yet. Ideally I was hoping to replace all of makefile functionality with jamfiles. Boost.build is attractive because support for new compilers/tools comes with new releases of boost.build and need not be added

On Thursday 21 October 2004 01:54, Vladimir Prus wrote: > On Wednesday 20 October 2004 12:01, Reid Spencer wrote: > > I'm re-thinking my penchant for automake. automake is great for many > > standard applications that just need to get portable makefiles up and > > running quickly. However, it turns out that LLVM is "different enough" > > from a standard

I tried building boost 1.45 release with clang 2.9 following instructions on http://blog.llvm.org/2010/05/clang-builds-boost.html but got the following result: $ clang++ --version clang version 2.9 (trunk 123420) Target: x86_64-apple-darwin10 Thread model: posix $ ./bjam toolset=clang Building the Boost C++ Libraries. Performing configuration checks - has_icu builds : no

On Wednesday 20 October 2004 12:01, Reid Spencer wrote: > I'm re-thinking my penchant for automake. automake is great for many > standard applications that just need to get portable makefiles up and > running quickly. However, it turns out that LLVM is "different enough" > from a standard application that automake might not be the best choice. I might just here to

On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:06 PM, David A. Greene <greened at obbligato.org> wrote: > OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> writes: > >> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:09 PM, David A. Greene <greened at obbligato.org> wrote: >>> BoostBook/QuickBook is really cool but I found it nearly impossible to >>> use outside of the Boost tree. In other words, a few

On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Keir Mierle <mierle at gmail.com> wrote: > Just a random observation from the Python world: Once Sphinx started taking > over as the dominant documentation tool, the quality of Python documentation > greatly improved. This is not just because sphinx produces well formatted > docs; it appears that the real driver behind the improvement is that

Stefanus Du Toit <sdt at rapidmind.com> writes: [snip] > We have considered contributing such a build system, and if we were to > do so would probably base it on SCons (http://www.scons.org/) because > we already use SCons extensively. At first, SCons is what I intended too. But then I read about the KDE experience and took the safe route :-) [snip] > Are you intending

On 28 Oct 2011, at 18:26, Daniel Dunbar wrote: > On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: >> >> You guys are mixing several things on the discussion. What Dan proposed >> makes no difference for Xcode. If it speeds up the Makefile-based build >> (something I doubt) that's good, but it is unnecessary for that system >> to

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Aaron Gray <aaronngray.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > poke ! I whipped up a quick example, this is a total of about an hour of work due to finding parameters to set it up, once that is finished though the actual documentation is simple. Look in the html subdirectory to see the generated html as separate files, but it can also generate a single large html

Correction, even the zip by itself is too big, here is the 7z, if someone wants a giant zip, I can host it somewhere... On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 6:49 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > The zip format was too big to fit through the moderator queue, so here > is another with just the zip by itself (although the 7z is only > 29kb...). > > On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at

Dmitri Makarov <nebraskin at yahoo.com> writes: >> Is it reasonable to ask > > Yes, it's reasonable. Since this is open source we depend on contributions from the community, etc... You know how the song goes. Seriously, I'll like to see a healthy MSVS build as much as you, but someone must do the work. > Moreover, I'd be content with a build system that

I have used Perforce also and fully agree it's wonderful. The only concern I have is with their license for open source projects. The only gotcha is that it must be renewed annually, and they reserve the right to not renew it (though they say they won't unreasonably deny renewals). Not sure how much this really matters, as Perforce strikes me as being one of those "do no

Hi everyone, Reid said: > Of the tools available, it seems that only subversion, arch, and > monotone are suitable for our purposes. But, we'd love to hear your > thoughts; especially if you have first-hand experience with these tools. Apart from using CVS as a client (as everyone does), I've only ever used Aegis (previous employer, for ~3 years) and Perforce (the employer

I'm building llvm in MSVS 2008. LoopUnroll.cpp includes UnrollLoop.h line 23: #include "llvm/Transforms/Utils/UnrollLoop.h" but there's no UnrollLoop.h anywhere to be found. My svn tree is synced to TOT. What am I missing?

> Is it reasonable to ask Yes, it's reasonable. Moreover, I'd be content with a build system that doesn't use MSVS IDE at all. If the build system could be parameterized to use microsoft cl compiler (cygwin gcc is useless for my purposes), e.g. something like in Boost project, I'd be more than happy to never care about VS project files. Yet, I want to limit my involvement

SimplifyLibCalls.cpp is no longer part of Transforms\IPO and Transforms\Scalar\SimplifyCFG.cpp is renamed to SimplifyCFG.cpp or something to that effect ( I didn't look up the actual checkins ). Having fixed that, I still can't get through the build: Creating library C:\work\s\llvm\win32\\bin\Win32\Debug/opt.lib and object C:\work\s\llvm\win32\\bin\Win32\Debug/opt.exp 1>opt.obj : error

Given that CVS seems to be a genuine problem for some of us, and that there's no reason in the world to change for others, I wonder if we shouldn't consider adopting a hybrid approach to source control, a la FreeBSD. There: - highly active developers bitten by CVS, - people working on particular, 'experimental' projects and - those who "just want to" ...use

On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 08:02:38PM -0800, Jeff Cohen wrote: > I have used Perforce also and fully agree it's wonderful. The only > concern I have is with their license for open source projects. The > only gotcha is that it must be renewed annually, and they reserve the > right to not renew it (though they say they won't unreasonably deny > renewals). Not sure how much

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016, Dmitri Stepanov wrote: >>> ?? shutdown-all-hosts.sh contains: >>> # Linux hosts >>> HOSTLIST="sim iogate br" >>> for host in $HOSTLIST >>> do >>> ... >>> ???? ssh $host halt -p >>> ... >>> done >>> ?? shutdown-all-hosts.sh works fine if it runned manually. >>> ?? But

When trying to build Boost using LLVM, I had this error: " error: ISO C++17 does not allow 'register' storage class specifier [-Wregister] " I attached the project-config.jam file I used to this message. Someone please help me out (if there's someone on here who can). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: