similar to: [LLVMdev] Patch for GettingStarted.html

Hello, seems like GettingStarted.html is outdated regarding the version numbers of the autoconf tools. I've changed it so they meet the versions in AutoRegen.sh. Josef -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GettingStarted.diff Type: text/x-patch Size: 1514 bytes Desc: not available URL:

On Nov 29, 2009, at 8:16 AM, Josef Eisl wrote: > Hello, > > seems like GettingStarted.html is outdated regarding the version numbers > of the autoconf tools. I've changed it so they meet the versions in > AutoRegen.sh. Hi Josef, llvm/docs/GettingStarted.html (in the main llvm svn repo) seems up to date. The "website" module in svn is an old broken thing that

I.e., I see this when I run `git fetch`: ``` $ git fetch -v llvm.org From http://llvm.org/git/llvm = [up to date] master -> llvm.org/master = [up to date] release_1 -> llvm.org/release_1 = [up to date] release_16 -> llvm.org/release_16 = [up to date] release_20 -> llvm.org/release_20 = [up to date] release_21 -> llvm.org/release_21 = [up to date]

Oliver Schneider <gmane at assarbad.net> writes: >>> However, we have official git mirrors of most of the projects on >>> llvm.org, would using them instead of svnsync be an option for you? >> >> Well, if the authoritative source code control system for all the >> llvm projects is svn, I'd just as soon use svn as the tool at my end. > The git

Do the buildbots only build debug components? I am seeing lots of this on trunk with release-style builds: [x86_64-off-opt]: Failed with signal(SIGABRT) at line 1 [x86_64-off-opt]: while running: llvm-as < /ptmp/dag/llvm- project.official/llvm/tags/RELEASE_25/test/Transforms/TailDup/basictest2.ll | opt -tailduplicate -disable-output [x86_64-off-opt]: Value still in symbol table! Type =

> On 2016-Feb-05, at 15:22, James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> wrote: > > That usually happens when someone deletes and then recreates an svn branch with the same name, as happened in r215001 and r215011. > It can be deleted now, if anyone wants to. ``` $ git push llvm.org :release_35 at 215010 fatal: unable to access 'http://llvm.org/git/llvm.git/': The requested

Thanks for your response! On 30/01/2019 20:18, Rui Ueyama wrote: > Hi Josef, > > Let me clarify my understanding. Do you want to keep original bitcode > files in the output executable when doing LTO, so that the resulting > executable contains both compiled bitcode (which is in native machine > instructions) and original bitcode files? Exactly! Kind of analogous to what

Maurice Gittens wrote: > Hi all, > > I just svn-updated the 2.5 branch on my machine and I noticed this > warning during the build. > > *** Warning: Linking the shared library > /home/maurice/installation/llvm/Debug/lib/libLTO.la against the non-libtool > *** objects /home/maurice/installation/llvm/Debug/lib/LLVMCppBackend.o >

Im trying to get 2.6.17-rc4-mm1 (which includes klibc) working on an nfs-root setup. Its not working, so I started adding printf()s (not printk()s !) 1st thing I notice is arg5 is empty, but arg 6 is real I could imagine this unexpected situation confusing kinit (will check..) Or is that empty arg intentional, so that it marks the beginning of pxelinux addons ? kinit:main: init-arg 0: /init

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:05 AM Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > That feature is probably too specific to your project. Most projects that > use LTO are using LTO just because it generates better code. Your project > is special as your program itself can also interpret LLVM bitcode, but > that's not the case for most other programs. > I

On 2011-08-29 04:21, Kurt Lidl wrote: > While I agree bootstrapping a new mirror from scratch is time and > resource consuming, this can be largely avoided by making a seed > of the svn tree available. (Basically, I think that looks like > a compressed tar file of the svn repository.) Or, a svnadmin dump > of the repo could be made available for the adventurous. Having the same

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

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

--- OK, what about this attempt? docs/GettingStarted.html | 6 +++++- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/GettingStarted.html b/docs/GettingStarted.html index 2e2200d..51aba29 100644 --- a/docs/GettingStarted.html +++ b/docs/GettingStarted.html @@ -252,7 +252,8 @@ software you will need.</p> </tr> <tr> <td>Cygwin/Win32</td>

--- My bad -- the patch was against 2.6. Hope this iteration will be the last :-) docs/GettingStarted.html | 6 +++++- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/GettingStarted.html b/docs/GettingStarted.html index 851bfb6..fd8f308 100644 --- a/docs/GettingStarted.html +++ b/docs/GettingStarted.html @@ -252,7 +252,8 @@ software you will need.</p> </tr>

Hello >  OK, what about this attempt? The patch cannot be applied flawlessly. Please consider reading http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#patches -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

============================================================= Henrik Bach LLVM Open Source Developer e-mail: henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com ============================================================= 'Nothing is impossible; The impossible just takes longer time :)' - Inventor of a new energy saver light bulp from Denmark. No software patents! Got Freedom? Software Freedom Day - 10th

>  My bad -- the patch was against 2.6. Hope this iteration will be the last :-) Please carefully read the link I provided and add patch as an attachement, not inline. Thanks. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:31 AM, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote: >> My bad -- the patch was against 2.6. Hope this iteration will be the last :-) > Please carefully read the link I provided and add patch as an > attachement, not inline. OK -- now as an attachment. Sorry for the git format (no svn checkout right now), but GNU patch should accept it. Btw,

No, some build release, and some build release-asserts. Historically, this is a typical sign of llvm being miscompiled, see the broken-gcc list. - Daniel On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 10:09 AM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > Do the buildbots only build debug components?  I am seeing lots of this on > trunk with release-style builds: > > [x86_64-off-opt]: Failed with