Displaying 20 results from an estimated 20000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Status of LLVM 2.5 - Recreating the branch"
2009 Feb 03
0
[LLVMdev] 2.5 Branch Created
LLVMers,
The 2.5 release branch has been created. You may check it out with the
following commands:
svn co https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/branches/release_25
svn co https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm-gcc-4.2/branches/release_25
svn co https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/test-suite/branches/release_25
Please do not commit anything to the release branch. If you have a
patch that needs
2007 Sep 13
1
[LLVMdev] LLVM 2.1 Branch Creation - 9PM PDT!
LLVMers,
I will be creating the branch in 30 minutes (9PM PDT). At that time,
I will send out mail announcing SVN commit access is suspended. Those
with commit privileges should refrain from committing until I send
out mail saying commit access is restored.
Thanks,
Tanya Lattner
2008 May 09
2
[LLVMdev] 2.3 Branch Creation TODAY!
LLVMers,
I will be creating the 2.3 release branch today at 9PM PDT. During that
time, commit access to SVN will be forbidden. I will send out mail shortly
before the branch creation, and once it has been completed.
Thanks,
Tanya
2008 May 09
0
[LLVMdev] 2.3 Branch Creation TODAY!
On May 9, 5:37 pm, "Tanya M. Lattner" <to... at nondot.org> wrote:
> LLVMers,
>
> I will be creating the 2.3 release branch today at 9PM PDT. During that
> time, commit access to SVN will be forbidden. I will send out mail shortly
> before the branch creation, and once it has been completed.
Hi Tanya,
I do not really understand this strict rule :-)
While I get it
2009 Feb 24
0
[LLVMdev] 2.5 Pre-release2 available for testing
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> wrote:
> LLVMers,
>
> The 2.5 pre-release2 is finally available for testing:
> http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.5/
>
> If you have time, I'd appreciate anyone who can help test the release.
> Please do the following:
>
> 1) Download/compile llvm source, and either compile llvm-gcc source or use
2009 Feb 02
1
[LLVMdev] Reminder: 2.5 branch re-creation tonight.
> On Monday 02 February 2009 13:20, Tanya M. Lattner wrote:
>> Just a reminder, I'll be re-creating the 2.5 branch tonight at 9pm PST.
>
> What does re-creating mean? Why can't the previously-created 2.5 branch
> simply be updated?
It means deleting the branch and creating a new one.
> I ask because svn history will look a little wierd and it makes it harder for
2009 Feb 02
2
[LLVMdev] Reminder: 2.5 branch re-creation tonight.
Just a reminder, I'll be re-creating the 2.5 branch tonight at 9pm PST.
-Tanya
2009 Feb 23
0
[LLVMdev] 2.5 Pre-release1 available for testing
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> wrote:
> LLVMers,
>
> The 2.5 pre-release is available for testing:
> http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.5/
>
I'm updating the Fedora packaging of LLVM, and with the 02/20
prerelease it fails to build on ppc64:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1148023
make[1]: Entering directory
2009 Feb 20
7
[LLVMdev] 2.5 Pre-release2 available for testing
LLVMers,
The 2.5 pre-release2 is finally available for testing:
http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.5/
If you have time, I'd appreciate anyone who can help test the release.
Please do the following:
1) Download/compile llvm source, and either compile llvm-gcc source or
use llvm-gcc binary (please compile llvm-gcc with fortran if you can).
2) Run make check, send me the testrun.log
3) Run
2009 Feb 02
0
[LLVMdev] Reminder: 2.5 branch re-creation tonight.
On Monday 02 February 2009 13:20, Tanya M. Lattner wrote:
> Just a reminder, I'll be re-creating the 2.5 branch tonight at 9pm PST.
What does re-creating mean? Why can't the previously-created 2.5 branch
simply be updated?
I ask because svn history will look a little wierd and it makes it harder for
third parties to track revisions and do merges.
2007 Dec 19
2
[LLVMdev] Reminder: LLVM 2.2 code freeze 1 month away
LLVMers,
The LLVM 2.2 release code freeze and branch creation is less than 1 month
away. All major changes should be commited to svn at least 1 week before
the code freeze. As a reminder, here is the complete release schedule
(which can also be found on the main page in the right sidebar):
Jan 16, 2008: Branch creation/Code Freeze (9PM PST).
Jan 18, 2008: First round of pre-release testing
2009 Feb 21
0
[LLVMdev] 2.5 Pre-release2 available for testing
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> wrote:
> LLVMers,
>
> The 2.5 pre-release2 is finally available for testing:
> http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.5/
>
> If you have time, I'd appreciate anyone who can help test the release.
> Please do the following:
>
> 1) Download/compile llvm source, and either compile llvm-gcc source or
2008 May 20
0
[LLVMdev] 2.3 Pre-release available for testing
I tested this pre-release on MSVC and I noted that none of the submitted
patches (mine or others) were applied.
So the llvm 2.3 will not compile out of the box in MSVC?
Razvan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tanya M. Lattner" <tonic at nondot.org>
To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 9:00 PM
Subject:
2008 May 19
2
[LLVMdev] 2.3 Pre-release available for testing
Just a reminder, please complete your testing by May 21st!
Thanks,
Tanya
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 00:25:41 -0700
From: Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org>
To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
Subject: 2.3 Pre-release available for testing
LLVMers,
The 2.3 pre-release is available for testing:
2009 Aug 18
0
[LLVMdev] Code Freeze this Friday!!!
Good day Tanya,
I would just like to clarify this for myself and a few other people
who maybe wondering,
Does this code freeze apply to;
* Clang.
* Compiler-RT.
Thanks for your time,
Best Regards,
Edward O'Callaghan.
2009/8/17 Tanya Lattner <lattner at apple.com>:
> LLVMers,
>
> The 2.6 code freeze is this friday, August 21, at 9pm PDT.
>
> All major changes should
2006 Oct 30
4
[LLVMdev] 1 Week before 1.9 Branch Creation
LLVMers,
It is now 1 week before I will create the 1.9 release branch.
I'm asking that all platform maintainers and available llvm developers
review the nightly tester results. Please XFAIL any dejagnu tests that are
currently failing, fix any warnings, and review the results of the full
llvm test suite. If a test failure is determined to be something that
needs to be fixed before the
2008 May 20
0
[LLVMdev] 2.3 Pre-release available for testing
This is my patch for MSVC 2008 and it was applied by Chris:
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20080512/062390.html
I tested it and it is ok for the 2.3 release.
Razvan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tanya Lattner" <tonic at nondot.org>
To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 7:40 AM
2008 May 10
0
[LLVMdev] 2.3 Branch Created!
Hi Tanya,
Are we allowed to patch the release branch yet? 50940 should go in.
Evan
On May 9, 2008, at 9:37 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote:
> LLVMers,
>
> The 2.3 branch has been created. I will now begin the pre-release
> testing and packaging. I will have the pre-release version tarballs
> and binaries ready on Monday, May 12th. I will ask you all to begin
> testing at that
2008 May 20
2
[LLVMdev] 2.3 Pre-release available for testing
On May 19, 2008, at 9:13 PM, Razvan Aciu wrote:
> I tested this pre-release on MSVC and I noted that none of the
> submitted
> patches (mine or others) were applied.
> So the llvm 2.3 will not compile out of the box in MSVC?
>
Please provide me with a link to the patch(s) that need to be applied
(llvm-commits archive email). I only apply patches that have been
sent to me and
2013 Feb 02
1
[LLVMdev] llvm.org DOWNTIME on 2/1 (Friday, February 1, 2013) & 2/4 (Monday, February 4, 2013)
llvm.org is now down. I will notify you when it is back up. This will take several hours.
-Tanya
On Feb 1, 2013, at 9:05 PM, Tanya Lattner <lattner at apple.com> wrote:
> Just a reminder, LLVM.org will be going down in 1 hour.
>
> Thank you,
> Tanya
>
> On Jan 28, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Tanya Lattner <lattner at apple.com> wrote:
>
>> To be clear:
>>