similar to: [LLVMdev] Dejagnu Tests

Hi, Tanya M. Lattner wrote: >> We were wondering if *all* of the dejagnu tests should pass (in the >> sense that no result should be unexpected), because we have a few failed >> tests on our build. > > make check should always be clean. However, sometimes people do commit > changes that impact platforms they are not able to test on and we do have > the occasional

On Jul 1, 2008, at 10:11 AMPDT, Edd Barrett wrote: > Hi, > > Tanya M. Lattner wrote: >>> We were wondering if *all* of the dejagnu tests should pass (in the >>> sense that no result should be unexpected), because we have a few >>> failed >>> tests on our build. >> >> make check should always be clean. However, sometimes people do

> We were wondering if *all* of the dejagnu tests should pass (in the > sense that no result should be unexpected), because we have a few failed > tests on our build. make check should always be clean. However, sometimes people do commit changes that impact platforms they are not able to test on and we do have the occasional failure. If you have failures, please file a bug with the

Rajika, A couple of comments: - You should provide a way to specify where llvm-gcc is built (just like llvm). - I would highly recommend allowing the user to only update llvm-gcc and not check it out from scratch each time. Checking out llvm-gcc is very time consuming. You would need to make sure that llvm and llvm-gcc have the same rev number and nuke the llvm obj/install dirs so you get a

I've finished adding the -rundejagnu option to the nightly tester script, which was the last step to fully support Dejagnu. I think now is the appropriate time to discuss keeping QMTest or switching to Dejagnu. A lot of work went into using QMTest, so I think we should make this decision carefully and before the 1.4 release. Here are the pros and cons in my eyes, please feel free to add your

> > Cons of QMTest: > > 1) You have to use the gui to add directories. > > I think you're wrong. Manually creating a directory would work, as QMTest does > not place anything special in directories. I may have worded this poorly, but I think you have to use the gui to add new directories or tests, or specific tests. Otherwise, it does not know what to do with those

On Sunday 28 November 2004 00:24, Tanya Lattner wrote: Just some comments from a QMTest user... Note however, that even with them, dejagnu looks better. > Cons of QMTest: > 1) You have to use the gui to add directories. I think you're wrong. Manually creating a directory would work, as QMTest does not place anything special in directories. > 2) You have to use the gui to XFAIL

Tanya Lattner wrote: > I've finished adding the -rundejagnu option to the nightly tester script, > which was the last step to fully support Dejagnu. I think now is the > appropriate time to discuss keeping QMTest or switching to Dejagnu. A lot > of work went into using QMTest, so I think we should make this decision > carefully and before the 1.4 release. > > Here are the

hi all, I was trying to build the latest LLVM gcc front end and it failed. rajika@:~/project/llvm/dst-directory$ svn info | grep URL URL: http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm-gcc-4.2/trunk configure option: ../dst-directory/configure --prefix=/usr/local/ --enable-llvm=/home/rajika/project/llvm/llvm-objects it gave me the following errors ../../dst-directory/gcc/llvm-convert.cpp:1163: error:

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Edd Barrett <vext01 at gmail.com> wrote: > If you use bison instead of yacc this bug is not exposed. Sorry, disregard this comment. Bison seems to never be detected properly even if you set YACC=bison or even YACC=/usr/local/bin/bison. But thats another story. Whilst struggling to work out how i got a working build i noticed that (with gcc 3.3.5) the

I'm having troubles running the test suite on OS X 10.4. Inside my objdir, 'make check' gives this: % make check llvm[0]: Running test suite

Did you update llvm and build that first? -Tanya On May 21, 2008, at 10:29 PM, Rajika Kumarasiri wrote: > hi all, > I was trying to build the latest LLVM gcc front end and it failed. > > rajika@:~/project/llvm/dst-directory$ svn info | grep URL > URL: http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm-gcc-4.2/trunk > > configure option: ../dst-directory/configure --prefix=/usr/local/

Yes, I am not done. Please see my original message. I will send mail to the list when I am finished and then you can complain. -Tanya On Feb 20, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Rajika Kumarasiri wrote: > I just tried to access http://llvm.org/docs/ but I am getting a 404, not found error. > > Rajika > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Tanya Lattner <lattner at apple.com> wrote: >

Just a reminder that the LLVM/Clang Server will be down starting today and through most of the weekend. It will go offline sometime between 12-1pm PST. I'll send out mail when the new server is up and ready. Thanks, Tanya

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008, Edd Barrett wrote: >> as much information as you can provide since it may not be a target that >> the majority of the developers have access to. > > The target is OpenBSD/i386 for now and later sparc64 and amd64. Most of Ok, that sounds like we need to increase testsuite portability. > the errors are to do with GNU grep syntax not being compatible with

Hi, On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 6:17 PM, Brooks Davis <brooks at freebsd.org> wrote: > LLVM 2.3 is building with no patches and gcc 4.2.1 on FreeBSD OK, so I have taken the changes to BitWriter.cpp from svn and that builds that section of code OK for llvm-2.3. The next part I will need help with, as I dont really know where to start: llvm[3]: Building ARM.td instruction information with

In which folder does proc "exp_debug" exist, because I've downloaded (not build and installed this version) the latest version of expect (5.42), but cannot find it? Henrik. ----Original Message Follows---- From: Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> Reply-To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at apple.com> wrote: > On Oct 18, 2009, at 7:49 PM, Daniel Dunbar wrote: >> If you haven't already tried it, please consider switch to 'make >> check-lit' as an alternative to 'make check'. If it doesn't work for >> you, or you find it doesn't do something DejaGNU did and you like,

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Michael McCracken wrote: > I'm mostly up to date, but not completely current with CVS. Is this > something that's been fixed recently, or is it a problem on my end? Try rerunning configure. For some reason, configure decided you didn't have runtest/expect. rerun configure, and if it still doesn't work, please send your config.log to llvmbugs. Thx,

OK, that explains it. I probably didn't have runtest installed the last time I ran configure, and re-syncing with CVS also caused it to reconfigure, solving the problem but confusing me. Thanks, -mike On 8/24/05, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Michael McCracken wrote: > > I'm mostly up to date, but not completely current with CVS. Is this