similar to: [LLVMdev] build warnings

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 4000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] build warnings"

2011 Oct 21
0
[LLVMdev] build warnings
Hi Paul, That should be easy enough, because the LLVM build has no warnings in it! Some of us build with -Werror, and even with those of us that don't warnings are not tolerated. You're already seeing all the warnings that are coming out of the build :) Cheers, James ________________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf
2011 Oct 23
5
[LLVMdev] build warnings
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 12:24 AM, James Molloy wrote: > Hi Paul, > > That should be easy enough, because the LLVM build has no warnings in it! > > Some of us build with -Werror, and even with those of us that don't warnings are not tolerated. You're already seeing all the warnings that are coming out of the build :) So, all the "variable might be used
2011 Oct 24
1
[LLVMdev] build warnings
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 10:34 PM, James Molloy wrote: > Hi, > > I haven't seen those errors. Clang and LLVM both build with no warnings on the 3 versions of GCC I test with. MSVC reports loads of warnings however. > $ make happiness ... Updated to revision 142790. ... make[4]: Entering directory `/home/ecsardu/LLVM/build-tcclab1/tools/clang/tools/libclang' llvm[4]: Compiling
2011 Oct 23
0
[LLVMdev] build warnings
Hi, I haven't seen those errors. Clang and LLVM both build with no warnings on the 3 versions of GCC I test with. MSVC reports loads of warnings however. Cheers, James ________________________________________ From: Csaba Raduly [rcsaba at gmail.com] Sent: 23 October 2011 18:44 To: James Molloy Cc: Paul Berube; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] build warnings On Sat, Oct 22,
2010 Dec 24
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM on Cygwin: why tests don't run
Good evening, Csaba! I think rather, Cygwin does not need to know what PATHEXT would be. A patch(0001) is attached. Another patch is for unittests. Lit does not find *Tests.exe in unittests on ToT. 2010/12/24 Csaba Raduly <rcsaba at gmail.com>: > P.S. > With the above change, "make check-all" starts to run. Estimated run > time: 40 hours on my 1.8GHz single-core
2014 Nov 18
2
[LLVMdev] Test failure
Hi, For a couple of days now, one of the tests fails: FAIL: LLVM :: MC/R600/sopp.s (16225 of 19902) ******************** TEST 'LLVM :: MC/R600/sopp.s' FAILED ******************** Script: -- /home/csabaraduly/workspace/LLVM/build/Release+Asserts/bin/llvm-mc -arch=r600 -mcpu=SI -show-encoding /home/csabaraduly/workspace/LLVM/llvm/test/MC/R600/sopp.s |
2010 Dec 23
3
[LLVMdev] LLVM on Cygwin: why tests don't run
Hi all, LLVM+clang builds fine under Cygwin 1.7, but "make check-all" fails to run because lit doesn't find the freshly built clang. The reason is as follows: in llvm/utils/lit/lit/Util.py, in the "which" method, there's 66: # Get suffixes to search. 67: pathext = os.environ.get('PATHEXT', '').split(os.pathsep) The problem is, PATHEXT is imported
2011 Apr 20
5
[LLVMdev] Is this a bug in clang?
> So... Are 40 and 41 the only legal behaviors or are there more? Since the program invokes undefined behavior, anything goes. The compiler is perfectly within its rights to send a rude email to your department chair if you compile that code. John
2013 Nov 14
2
[LLVMdev] Quad-Core ARMv7 Build Slave Seeks Noble Purpose
Yes, ARM normally runs as a little-endian and it is a 32-bit CPU. It CAN be configured to be a big-endian system, but that requires hardware support as far as I know. I do have an old, slow Mac Mini G4 PowerPC (big-endian) that I could hook up as a builder too. I was thinking of it the moment you mentioned big endian. I actually bought it for testing C++ code on because big-endian machines are
2011 Oct 20
4
[LLVMdev] error building clang
The latest in my problems building clang-only: llvm[4]: Linking Debug+Asserts executable clang /llvm/build/Debug+Asserts/lib/libclangLex.a: could not read symbols: File format not recognized collect2: ld returned 1 exit status Any suggestions appreciated. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:
2015 Oct 14
3
../../../Makefile.common:60:../../../Makefile.config:don't have that file or directory
I installed LLVM3.7.0 according to the LLVM document. I can use "clang","LLVM-dis"commands ,and so on. but when I execute commad "make" at llvm/lib/Transform/Hello directory, the error is : ../../../Makefile.common:60:../../../Makefile.config:don't have that file or directory ../../../Makefile.common:68:../../../Makefile.rules:don't have that file or
2013 May 16
5
[LLVMdev] Test failures
Hi, Two days ago, the test suite started failing. Initially there were hundreds of failing tests; now only seven remain. They appear to be related to SystemZ. Here's the last failed test: ******************** FAIL: LLVM :: MC/Disassembler/SystemZ/unmapped.txt (11484 of 14435) ******************** TEST 'LLVM :: MC/Disassembler/SystemZ/unmapped.txt' FAILED ******************** Script:
2017 Jun 08
2
Failing unit tests
lit.py: ~/workspace/LLVM/llvm/tools/clang/test/lit.cfg:200: note: using clang: '~/workspace/LLVM/ninjacmake/./bin/clang' -- Testing: 37268 tests, 8 threads -- Testing: 0 .. FAIL: Builtins-i386-linux :: divsc3_test.c (4326 of 37268) ******************** TEST 'Builtins-i386-linux :: divsc3_test.c' FAILED ******************** Script: -- ~/workspace/LLVM/ninjacmake/./bin/clang
2011 Feb 09
3
[LLVMdev] Building LLVM on Cygwin.
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 9:40 AM, NAKAMURA Takumi <geek4civic at gmail.com>wrote: > Anand, > > > I have not tried building llvm-gcc, though, ... > > Please show me "/path/to/config.status --version". > [Anand] Here is the config.status output taken from '/cygdrive/c/llvm-2.8': ./config.status --version llvm config.status 2.8 configured by
2013 Nov 14
0
[LLVMdev] Quad-Core ARMv7 Build Slave Seeks Noble Purpose
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Mikael Lyngvig wrote: > Yes, ARM normally runs as a little-endian and it is a 32-bit CPU. It CAN be > configured to be a big-endian system, but that requires hardware support as > far as I know. > > I do have an old, slow Mac Mini G4 PowerPC (big-endian) that I could hook up > as a builder too. I was thinking of it the moment you mentioned big
2013 May 16
1
[LLVMdev] Test failures
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 16 May 2013 09:01, Csaba Raduly <rcsaba at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> "s390x--linux-gnu" seems wrong: either there's a dash too many or a >> word too few. > > > Nope, this triple is correct. The canonicalization of the triple (actually a > quadruple)
2011 Oct 21
0
[LLVMdev] error building clang
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:59 PM, monica j wrote: > The latest in my problems building clang-only: > > llvm[4]: Linking Debug+Asserts executable clang > /llvm/build/Debug+Asserts/lib/libclangLex.a: could not read symbols: File > format not recognized > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status What is the output of file /llvm/build/Debug+Asserts/lib/libclangLex.a ? Csaba -- GCS
2011 Apr 20
3
[LLVMdev] Is this a bug in clang?
This code is undefined, meaning that all bets are off, don't do it. I.e. It reads the value of I between two sequence points and uses it for something other than determining the value written. From: Csaba Raduly Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 3:44 AM To: Joe Armstrong Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Is this a bug in clang? Hi Joe On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Joe
2011 Oct 22
1
[LLVMdev] error building clang
Any input on this? I cleaned up the whole directory and re-build. still get the error. I am builing on x86. downloaded clang from llvm.org. Should I pick up an older version? llvm[4]: Linking Debug+Asserts executable clang > /llvm/build/Debug+Asserts/lib/libclangLex.a: could not read symbols: File > format not recognized > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status file
2011 Apr 20
2
[LLVMdev] Is this a bug in clang?
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Joe Armstrong wrote: > > It seems very strange to me that the ansi standard says "XXX is > undefined" and that both clang and gcc > can detect that something is undefined and that by default they > compile the offending code without > any feelings of guilt. "The good thing — the only good thing! — about undefined behavior in