similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM/Clang release v3.5.1

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 10:30 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo at hahnjo.de> wrote: > On 2018-08-27 09:44, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >> Yeah, I see. >> You have an unusual development process seen from my POV. > > > GNOME does the same, to pick one example: > https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointTwentynine > Tarballs are due on Monday, official release and announcement

Thanks for the information Tobias. - Sedat - On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 3:31 PM Tobias Hieta <tobias at plexapp.com> wrote: > > Sedat, > > In Hans announcement yesterday he pointed out that he would upload source tarballs as soon as possible: > > "I'll get the source tarballs and docs published as soon as possible, and binaries as they become available" >

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Marc Dietrich <marvin24 at gmx.de> wrote: >> Patch 1 adds a check for the compilers visibility macro to configure.ac. >> Patch 2 avoids redefined symbol errors in clang of the tls entry points. >> Based on a suggestion from Rafael Ávila de Espíndola

On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 12:34 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 1:55 AM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:48 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> sorry, but I cannot

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:48 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: >> sorry, but I cannot see any tarballs shipped in [2]? >> Forgot to upload? >> >> Would like to give this pre-release a try on my Ubuntu/precise AMD64 system. > > They're not ready yet. It

Hmm, the clang+llvm-3.7.1-x86_64-sles11.3-linux-gnu.tar.xz tarball I uploaded doesn't seem to have made it on to this releases dir. I'm still a bit new to the process, is there a step that I skipped? On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 4:13 AM, Sedat Dilek via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 27 June 2016 at 07:00, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: >> Building with CMake sets the version-string correct whereas using >> autotools as build-system does not. > > Hi Sedat, > > This was reported earlier and it's unfortunate, but we don't support

On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 11:12 PM Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 10:53 PM Nathan Chancellor > <natechancellor at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > When building with Clang + -Wtautological-compare and > > CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK unset: > > > > Hi Nathan, > > thanks for the quick patch. > > I can confirm

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Chris Bieneman <cbieneman at apple.com> wrote: >> [ brutal-snip ] >> ... >>> [ TODO#S: Before doing a 2nd build (and in a 3rd run using more >>>

Signed-off-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> --- CMakeLists.txt | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/CMakeLists.txt b/CMakeLists.txt index ed7aeb026f5d..60fe427e456e 100644 --- a/CMakeLists.txt +++ b/CMakeLists.txt @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ set(LLVM_VERSION_PATCH 0) set(LLVM_VERSION_SUFFIX svn) if (NOT PACKAGE_VERSION) - set(PACKAGE_VERSION

Git tags and SVN tags are completely different beasts (git tag is simply a "second name" attached to revision, while on svn the tag could be arbitrary different). There is no way to automate the process - in general svn tag might not correspond (by contents) to any other revision in the repository. The only way to somehow emulate svn tags on git is to create a separate branch on each

Am Montag, 16. Februar 2015, 12:42:19 schrieb Sedat Dilek: > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Marc Dietrich <marvin24 at gmx.de> wrote: > > Am Samstag, 14. Februar 2015, 18:20:12 schrieb Dimitry Andric: > >> On 11 Feb 2015, at 11:16, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:09 AM, Emil Velikov > >> >

LGTM. -Chris > On Feb 27, 2015, at 3:27 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> > --- > CMakeLists.txt | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/CMakeLists.txt b/CMakeLists.txt > index ed7aeb026f5d..60fe427e456e 100644 > --- a/CMakeLists.txt > +++

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Marc Dietrich <marvin24 at gmx.de> wrote: > Am Dienstag, 17. Februar 2015, 12:42:00 schrieb Sedat Dilek: >> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Marc Dietrich <marvin24 at gmx.de> wrote: >> > Am Dienstag, 17. Februar 2015, 11:58:06 schrieb Sedat Dilek: >> >> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Marc Dietrich <marvin24 at

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Sedat Dilek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: >> On 27 June 2016 at 07:00, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: >>> Building with CMake sets the version-string correct whereas using >>> autotools as build-system

Yeah, I see. You have an unusual development process seen from my POV. IMHO you can provide the tarballs before the "binaries" are uploaded which means "prebuilt binaries". That could increase the quality of developing when different arch/os maintainers give their OK. But for 7.0.0rc1 I see only prebuilt binaries for... * macOS * FreeBSD10 AMD64 * Windows (32-bit) * Windows

On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 9:29 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 7:51 AM, Matthias Klose <doko at debian.org> wrote: >> On 28.08.2018 13:55, Sedat Dilek wrote: >>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:26 AM, Sedat Dilek via llvm-dev

Hi Tom, I followed a bit the mailing-list but still see no LLVM v3.7.1 tarballs. Can you pleas take care of this? In case of that i386 breakage do a new v3.7.2 release, please. Not sure if this has impact on x86_64 (AMD64)? Thanks. Regards, - Sedat - [1] https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=25920

When building with Clang + -Wtautological-compare and CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK unset: arch/x86/mm/mmio-mod.c:375:6: warning: comparison of array 'downed_cpus' equal to a null pointer is always false [-Wtautological-pointer-compare] if (downed_cpus == NULL && ^~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ arch/x86/mm/mmio-mod.c:405:6: warning: comparison of array 'downed_cpus'

On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Hahnfeld, Jonas <Hahnfeld at itc.rwth-aachen.de> wrote: > Hi Sedat, > > as already said multiple times for the past releases: The tarballs will be > uploaded once they are finished. The tagged version currently gets tested > which is done with an export from SVN AFAIK. > > Please just be patient and give the process some time, With the