similar to: [LLVMdev] Volunteers needed for LLVM Release Team

Hello, Tanya > 4) Mingw x86 (Anton do you want to continue this?) Yes, I'm still going to prepare llvm-gcc mingw32 images. However, the testing procedure for mingw is slightly different due to lack of dejagnu stuff. However, I have plans to fix the main LLVM testsuite to be more mingw32-friendly :) -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint

I noticed that the mingw release only contains binaries and not libraries nor header files. I think it would be nice if the mingw release contained the same files as the other releases. This would mean that people who want to use LLVM with the Haskell bindings on Windows don't have to build and install LLVM (first installing mingw), but they could just download binaries and install those.

Hello, > I noticed that the mingw release only contains binaries and not > libraries nor header files. That's correct, because headers will contain, for example, absolute paths from the box I've built the libraries on (mostly in config.h and llvm-config script). I won't provide neither libraries nor headers, since I don't know how to make them 'path-neutral' without

Bah, headers still broken, sending to list this time: On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 6:30 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Tanya Lattner <lattner at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Mar 13, 2010, at 7:01 AM, R P Herrold wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010, Tanya Lattner wrote: >>> >>>>> I

I'm looking for someone to qualify x86-32 linux for 2.7 and beyond. If you want a basic idea of how the release process works, see this: http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html Please email me if you are interested! Thanks, Tanya -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

All, We need volunteers for the Hacker’s Lab at the upcoming 2017 LLVM Developers’ Meeting! The Hacker’s Lab is for small groups to form to discuss topics or work on problems. Please let me know ASAP if you will able to volunteer so I can add your topic to the online listing and make appropriate signs. The Hackers Lab is split into 1.5 hour sessions. During each session, the Hackers Lab will

I'm still in need for moderators for the following sessions: > Moderator #3 (11:15-12:45, Regency 1) > Verified LLVM: Formalizing the semantics of the LLVM Intermediate Representation for Verified Program Transformations- Santosh Nagarakatte, University of Pennsylvania/Rutgers University > Integrated Security, using LLVM for Dynamic and Static Security Tasks- Jared Carlson,

On Aug 19, 2009, at 4:30 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote: > On Aug 4, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > >> Hello, Martin >> >>> llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 is failing to build from source on arm, sparc, >>> powerpc and ia64, only succeeding on i386 and amd64: >>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=llvm-gcc-4.2;dist=unstable >>> so it

On Aug 21, 2009, at 2:23 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > On Aug 19, 2009, at 4:30 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote: > >> On Aug 4, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: >> >>> Hello, Martin >>> >>>> llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 is failing to build from source on arm, sparc, >>>> powerpc and ia64, only succeeding on i386 and amd64: >>>>

Ok, I have good news! Thanks for the help! On Jun 2, 2008, at 11:11 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote: > Many of you are probably wondering about the status of the 2.3 > release. Unfortunately, this release has been very difficult and > the list of regressions very high. The list has finally dwindled > down to the following regressions: > > Linux/x86: >

On Aug 4, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > Hello, Martin > >> llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 is failing to build from source on arm, sparc, >> powerpc and ia64, only succeeding on i386 and amd64: >> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=llvm-gcc-4.2;dist=unstable >> so it looks like the 2.5 release was never properly tested before it >> was published.

Many of you are probably wondering about the status of the 2.3 release. Unfortunately, this release has been very difficult and the list of regressions very high. The list has finally dwindled down to the following regressions: Linux/x86: SingleSource/Benchmarks/CoyoteBench/fftbench [ JIT Codegen, JIT] MultiSource/Applications/minisat/minisat [CBE] Darwin/x86:

Well, doing a runtest in the test folder gave me these results: ----------------- WARNING: Couldn't find the global config file. WARNING: No tool specified Test Run By llvm on Fri Jan 7 20:55:24 2005 Native configuration is i686-pc-mingw32 === tests === ERROR: (DejaGnu) proc "exp_debug" does not exist. The error code is NONE The info on the error is: can't rename to

> Well, doing a runtest in the test folder gave me these results: > ----------------- > WARNING: Couldn't find the global config file. WARNING: No tool specified > Test Run By llvm on Fri Jan 7 20:55:24 2005 > Native configuration is i686-pc-mingw32 > > === tests === > > ERROR: (DejaGnu) proc "exp_debug" does not exist. The error code is NONE The >

I found that it was runtest.exp which referenced to the internal exp_debug function. For testing purposes I disabled the reference and ran a new: make check VERBOSE=1 which gave me this: ------------------ if test -d "/C/projects/build/MinGW/llvm-2-1/test" ; then \ if test -f "/C/projects/build/MinGW/llvm-2-1/test/Makefile" ; then \ echo llvm[0]: Running test suite ; \

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 Sun, 9 Jan 2005, Henrik Bach wrote: > I found that it was runtest.exp which referenced to the internal exp_debug > function. For testing purposes I disabled the reference and ran a new: Hi Henrik, Unfortunately, none of us has access to a MinGW setup, so we cannot debug this problem. If you're hacking on dejagnu or expect itself (because it has not yet been ported to MinGW

Can any one, who has dejagnu and expect installed and working, send me an output when running '(g)make check' from llvm. Thanks. Henrik. ============================================================= Henrik Bach LLVM Open Source Developer e-mail: henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com ============================================================= 'Nothing is impossible; The impossible

Has there been much thought of attempting to automate this process? I could imagine a fairly standard script that scrubbed a history for interesting tidbits. Of course a standard methodology for labeling types of commits would help this in the future. A very simple script could at least do unique word counts and throw out words that match a dictionary (like parts of speech, contributer names,

I'm using configure. On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 5:12 AM, Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: > Lennart Augustsson <lennart at augustsson.net> writes: > >> Commenting out the Hello transformation I get these link errors: >> >> llvm[2]: Linking Debug Shared Library LTO.dll >>