similar to: [LLVMdev] How to use the JIT with llvm-gfortran ?

Hi, I have installed llvm and llvm-gfortran on Pentium4 machine using 32-bit Ubuntu, it works fine. I recently installed them on AMD64-Ubuntu 8.04, llvm-gfortran gave me following errors $ llvm-gfortran -Wall hello.f95 -o hellof /home/jli127/LLVM/llvm-gcc/install/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.2.1/../../../../lib64/libgfortran.a(error.o): In function `_gfortrani_gfc_itoa':

What's the difference between user "123" and "devries"? Based on the output here, they seem the same..? tleilax*CLI> tleilax*CLI> sip show users Username Secret Accountcode Def.Context ACL Forcerport 201 password 201 default No Yes 123

Hi, > I have installed llvm and llvm-gfortran on Pentium4 machine using 32-bit > Ubuntu, it works fine. I recently installed them on AMD64-Ubuntu 8.04, > llvm-gfortran gave me following errors > > $ llvm-gfortran -Wall hello.f95 -o hellof this works here on x86-64 ubuntu 8.10. I took a look in my libgfortran.a and it doesn't reference any of the symbols you mention. >

Hi Duncan, Thanks for your answers. Compiling .s file is OK after adding the -lgfortran -lgfortranbegin. I replace my Ubuntu 8.04 and by Ubuntu 8.10. And I checked all new packages installed by 'apt-get' are amd64 version. However after compiling the llvm-gfortran, I got the same error. Here is my configure arguments $ ../llvm-gcc4.2-2.3.source/configure --prefix=`pwd`/../install

On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 08:46:13 -0500, Andres wrote: > A "sip set debug on" will give you more info on why you are getting the > 404. It probably has to do something with your context/dialplan. on tleilax: tleilax*CLI> tleilax*CLI> sip set debug on SIP Debugging enabled tleilax*CLI> on doge: thufir at doge:~$ thufir at doge:~$ sudo sipsak -vv -s sip:devries at

I'm reading the O'Reilly "Asterisk the definitive guide", 4th ed, with a starfish on it. In some ways, astonishing that it's not really that definitive, it's more general -- and it only clocks in at one ream of paper! In any event, I'm having some port problems on my home network: http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/81752/ I need to open ports for

The NIST F77 test suite doesn't seem to be compatible with gfortran at all, so I had to work from my own sample codes, and generate test cases from them. Here's what works now, and I have a separate test case for each of these: statement functions intrinsic functions (print, cos, etc) loops, goto statments scalarized array operations function calls with *no arguments* simple common

On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 15:07:35 -0500, Andres wrote: > This is showing nothing so I don't think your test message even made it > here. I think it looped in the 'doge' server. I was wondering the same thing :) in tleilax, I looked in /var/log/asterisk/messages and see: [Feb 20 15:13:19] VERBOSE[3661] chan_sip.c: [Feb 20 15:13:19] <--- SIP read from UDP:192.168.1.3:38154

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > Here's what works now, and I have a separate test case for each of these: > > statement functions > intrinsic functions (print, cos, etc) > loops, goto statments > scalarized array operations > function calls with *no arguments* > simple common blocks Great! > Function calls with more than one argument don't work.

I'm looking into the dialplan specifics: tleilax:~ # tleilax:~ # cat /etc/asterisk/extensions.conf [general] static=yes writeprotect=no [globals] CONSOLE=Console/dsp ; Console interface for demo TRUNK=DAHDI/r1 ; Trunk interface TRUNKX=DAHDI/r2 ; 2nd trunk interface TRUNKIAX=IAX2/ASTtest1:test at 10.10.10.16:4569 ; IAX trunk

Anton, With regard to the gfortran test cases which don't fail on x86_64 Linux, these are the exact gfortran.log entries for them under i686 Darwin9... > FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_12.f90 -O0 (internal compiler error) > FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_12.f90 -O0 (test for excess errors) Executing on host:

On 9/1/06, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > > I wanted to know if I should submit patches with comments around them > > like the "APPLE LOCAL LLVM" ones that mark the LLVM-only changes to > > the tree. I'd like to make it as easy as possible to apply these, so > > let me know any rules I

Hi, > Here is my configure arguments > $ ../llvm-gcc4.2-2.3.source/configure --prefix=`pwd`/../install > --program-prefix=llvm- \ > --disable-shared --disable-multilib \ > --enable-llvm=/llvm/llvm-obj --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran this looks ok to me. It's essentially the same as what I use. Try with 2.4 (about to be released). I'm not sure I ever tried to build the

On Sat, Apr 09, 2011 at 08:56:49AM -0600, Marcus G. Daniels wrote: > On 4/9/2011 6:09 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > > Hi Jack, thanks for the numbers. Any chance of analysing why gcc does better on > > those where it does much better than dragonegg? > > > > Ciao, Duncan. > Also, does -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns get Dragonegg to > match GCC performance

On 4/9/2011 6:09 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Jack, thanks for the numbers. Any chance of analysing why gcc does better on > those where it does much better than dragonegg? > > Ciao, Duncan. Also, does -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns get Dragonegg to match GCC performance where GCC was faster? Marcus

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > Hi, I have a first quick patch and a question. The patch links f951 > with g++ when LLVM is enabled. It's at the end of this email. Thanks, applied! > I wanted to know if I should submit patches with comments around them > like the "APPLE LOCAL LLVM" ones that mark the LLVM-only changes to > the tree. I'd like to

Hi, This question was first posted wrongly on R-help. Apologize for the inconvenience. I am working at a major financial institution and we would like to embed R in one of our front office application. The application is written in C/C++ so I started by trying to compile the examples in "tests/Embedding" of R 2.0.1. I have modified "tests/Embedding/Makefile" according to

On 2/20/15 6:15 AM, thufir wrote: > What's the difference between user "123" and "devries"? Based on the > output here, they seem the same..? > > tleilax*CLI> > tleilax*CLI> sip show users > Username Secret Accountcode > Def.Context ACL Forcerport > 201 password 201 > default

Hi, I **think** that I have user of thufir101, because I get a 200 response below, but I also get a 404. It seems to depend on how I send the ip address/fqdn? tleilax*CLI> tleilax*CLI> sip show users Username Secret Accountcode Def.Context ACL Forcerport 201 password 201 default No Yes

On 2/20/15 2:29 PM, thufir wrote: > On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 08:46:13 -0500, Andres wrote: > > >> A "sip set debug on" will give you more info on why you are getting the >> 404. It probably has to do something with your context/dialplan. > > on tleilax: > > tleilax*CLI> > tleilax*CLI> sip set debug on > SIP Debugging enabled > tleilax*CLI>