Displaying 20 results from an estimated 10000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] x86-64 linux llvm-gcc broken"
2008 Jun 17
0
[LLVMdev] x86-64 linux llvm-gcc broken
I think this is fixed. Please try again.
Evan
On Jun 17, 2008, at 8:39 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
> My nightly tester reports that it failed to bootstrap today:
>
> Comparing stages 2 and 3
> warning: ./cc1-checksum.o differs
> warning: ./cc1plus-checksum.o differs
> Bootstrap comparison failure!
> ./c-cppbuiltin.o differs
> ./real.o differs
> ./build/genautomata.o
2007 Apr 27
2
[LLVMdev] Boostrap Failure -- Expected Differences?
The saga continues.
I've been tracking the interface changes and merging them with
the refactoring work I'm doing. I got as far as building stage3
of llvm-gcc but the object files from stage2 and stage3 differ:
warning: ./cc1-checksum.o differs
warning: ./cc1plus-checksum.o differs
(Are the above two ok?)
The list below is clearly bad. I think it's every object file in
the
2008 Dec 16
2
[LLVMdev] ICE while building llvm-gcc
I'm on OSX 10.5, trying to build a svn checkout of llvm-gcc. I've also
checked out llvm. Both are synced to r61075.
I'm using Apple's gcc 4.0.1:
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-apple-darwin9
Configured with: /var/tmp/gcc/gcc-5488~2/src/configure
--disable-checking -enable-werror --prefix=/usr --mandir=/share/man
--enable-languages=c,objc,c++,obj-c++
2009 Feb 12
4
[LLVMdev] problems running test suite (-mllvm -disable-llvm-optzns)
I'm trying to run some of the test suite using the instructions here:
http://llvm.org/docs/TestingGuide.html#quicktestsuite
I've built llvm myself, but I'm using pre-built binaries of llvm-gcc
(from http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.5/llvm-gcc4.2-2.5-x86-linux-RHEL4.tar.gz).
Here's what happens:
foad at debian:~/svn/llvm-project/test-suite/trunk$ ./configure
2011 Oct 13
5
[LLVMdev] Reminder: LLVM 3.0 Branching Friday!
This is just a reminder to say that we will be branching for the LLVM 3.0 release Friday!
07:00:00 p.m. Friday October 14, 2011 PDT
02:00:00 a.m. Saturday October 15, 2011 GMT
Now is the time to look at the buildbots and see what fixes they need:
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/console
As of this writing, we have:
• several test failures on llvm-gcc self-host:
2008 Dec 17
2
[LLVMdev] ICE while building llvm-gcc
Thanks for the quick answer! Syncing to r61112 got rid of the ICE, but
I still get the following error:
make "DESTDIR=" "RPATH_ENVVAR=DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH"
"TARGET_SUBDIR=i686-apple-darwin9"
"bindir=/Users/jyasskin/src/llvm-gcc-4.2/trunk/obj/../install/bin"
"datadir=/Users/jyasskin/src/llvm-gcc-4.2/trunk/obj/../install/share"
2011 Oct 14
0
[LLVMdev] Reminder: LLVM 3.0 Branching Friday!
Hi Bill,
> As of this writing, we have:
>
> • several test failures on llvm-gcc self-host:
>
> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/llvm-gcc-i386-linux-selfhost/builds/25
I can reproduce this here. I'll poke at it this weekend sometime.
> • a miscompile in one of the llvm-gcc testers:
>
> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/llvm-x86_64-linux-checks/builds/55
>
>
2007 Apr 30
0
[LLVMdev] Boostrap Failure -- Expected Differences?
On Apr 27, 2007, at 3:50 PM, David Greene wrote:
> The saga continues.
>
> I've been tracking the interface changes and merging them with
> the refactoring work I'm doing. I got as far as building stage3
> of llvm-gcc but the object files from stage2 and stage3 differ:
>
>
> warning: ./cc1-checksum.o differs
> warning: ./cc1plus-checksum.o differs
>
>
2009 Feb 12
0
[LLVMdev] problems running test suite (-mllvm -disable-llvm-optzns)
Hello, Jay
> I guess this is because the test suite is trying to run "llvm-gcc
> -mllvm -disable-llvm-optzns", which never seems to work, because
> llvm-gcc mangles the command line before it gets to cc1plus.
That's correct. The driver changes the order of the options provided.
You need to provided this option to cc1 / cc1plus directly
> Is it just me having this
2009 Feb 12
1
[LLVMdev] problems running test suite (-mllvm -disable-llvm-optzns)
Hi,
> > I guess this is because the test suite is trying to run "llvm-gcc
> > -mllvm -disable-llvm-optzns", which never seems to work, because
> > llvm-gcc mangles the command line before it gets to cc1plus.
> That's correct. The driver changes the order of the options provided.
> You need to provided this option to cc1 / cc1plus directly
Dan fixed this
2004 Aug 03
2
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver [high-level comments]
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004, Bill Wendling wrote:
> I admit a bias here: I've worked with MS style INI files. They didn't
> leave a good impression with me. However, they do fit the bill for a lot
> of applications. What do you envision a typical INI file to look like?
I was thinking of something simple like this:
[.c]
compile = cc1 %in -o %out
optimize = gccas %in -o %out.bc
link
2008 Jul 06
3
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] patch to compile llvm-gcc using nightly tester script(NewNightlyTester.pl)
hello every body.
Here with I have attached the patch which compile the llvm-gcc using nightly
tester script. This patch add the following capabilities to the
NewNightlyTester.pl script.
1. Checkout the llvm-gcc4.2 source from the SVN.
2. Compile the checkout llvm-gcc4.2 source tree.
3. Gather the configure/make out put informations.
4. Add the (3) informations to the %hash_of_data hash to be
2009 Feb 12
0
[LLVMdev] problems running test suite (-mllvm -disable-llvm-optzns)
Hi,
> I'm trying to run some of the test suite using the instructions here:
>
> http://llvm.org/docs/TestingGuide.html#quicktestsuite
>
> I've built llvm myself, but I'm using pre-built binaries of llvm-gcc
> (from http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.5/llvm-gcc4.2-2.5-x86-linux-RHEL4.tar.gz).
>
> Here's what happens:
the llvm testsuite (from svn, right?) uses
2008 Apr 05
4
[LLVMdev] Proposal for improving the llvm nightly tester
hi all,
After having some discussions in the IRC, I am trying here to come up with a
proposal for GSoC 2008 for improving the llvm nightly tester[1].Following
are the ideas and suggestions that came up in the discussion, if you have
any comment or any other suggestion please add them to the list. I have
some doubts in some places.
1. Improvements to the perl script which manage actual testing
2008 Jul 07
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] patch to compile llvm-gcc using nightly tester script(NewNightlyTester.pl)
hello everybody,
I have added few improvements to my patch. Please review the new patch
directly.
Thanks!
-Rajika
On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Rajika Kumarasiri <rajikacc at gmail.com>
wrote:
> hello every body.
>
> Here with I have attached the patch which compile the llvm-gcc using
> nightly tester script. This patch add the following capabilities to the
>
2008 Dec 17
0
[LLVMdev] ICE while building llvm-gcc
Jeffrey Yasskin wrote:
> Comparing stages 2 and 3
> warning: ./cc1-checksum.o differs
> warning: ./cc1plus-checksum.o differs
> Bootstrap comparison failure!
> ./c-decl.o differs
> ./cp/decl.o differs
> ./df-core.o differs
> ./gcc.o differs
> ./i386.o differs
> ./stor-layout.o differs
> ./tree-pretty-print.o differs
> ./tree.o differs
> make[2]: ***
2004 Aug 03
0
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver [high-level comments]
I have a very simple XML document type that I use for configuring XPS
systems. There's only four elements and it follows much the same kind of
grouped name/value pairs that Chris is suggesting. Chris' example would
be like:
<configuration name="llvm">
<group name=".c">
<item name="compile">cc1 %in -o %out</item>
<item
2009 Mar 25
7
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc 2.5 libexec installed without program-prefix
I build llvm-gcc as:
../llvm-gcc4.2-2.5.source/configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --program-
prefix=llvm
So it should install into /usr/local/... but add llvm- prefix. This is so
llvm-gcc is found by llvm
(http://llvm.org/releases/2.5/docs/GettingStarted.html claims that's what it
is looking for)
and also so there will be no conflict with system gcc.
But I see:
2008 Apr 05
0
[LLVMdev] Proposal for improving the llvm nightly tester
My main complaints about the nightly tester are:
Loading the web pages is waaay tooo sllooooow
The information provided is not terribly useful for tracking down
bugs. What bug fixers need is environment+command line options
adequate to reproduce the problem. Access to the run logs would be a
good start.
On Apr 4, 2008, at 9:22 PM, Rajika Kumarasiri wrote:
> hi all,
> After having
2008 Mar 22
2
[LLVMdev] Proposal for GSoC project for improving llvm-test testsuite
Hello every body,
Thank you all for your great suggestions and feedbacks, I'd forward the
detailed proposal within couple of days. And also if I need to clarify any
thing I'll ask in the list. Thanks again.
Regards,
Rajika
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote:
> While on the subject of the testsuite, some random thoughts:
>
> - show