similar to: [LLVMdev] [3.6 Release] Release Candidate 2 available

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote: > Hans, > >>> I see a Git branch "release_36", but what has v3.6.0rc2 for a >>> commit-id, can you tags that? >>> No, there are no tags at all @ github. >> >> Anton, is it possible to translate the svn tags to git tags? > In the past we had problems

On 09/02/15 17:44, Emil Velikov wrote: > Hi Sedat, > > On 07/02/15 22:42, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> [ Please CC me I am not subscribed to mesa-dev and llvmdev MLs ] >> >> Hi, >> >> I already reported this when playing 1st time with my llvm-toolchain >> v3.6.0rc2 and mesa v10.3.7 [1]. >> The issue still remains in mesa v10.4.4. >> >> So,

> In conclusion: > Why are people using Git disadvantaged? Short answer: because of git-svn and differences between what is a tag in git and svn. Long answer: git-svn never created proper git tags. Instead, it converted svn tags to branches (because technically branches and tags are same in svn). These branches were orphan and not usable for bunch of things (I believe Takumi can provide a

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

[ Please CC me I am not subscribed to mesa-dev and llvmdev MLs ] Hi, I already reported this when playing 1st time with my llvm-toolchain v3.6.0rc2 and mesa v10.3.7 [1]. The issue still remains in mesa v10.4.4. So, this is a field test to see if LLVM/Clang v3.6.0rc2 fits my needs. I see the following build-error... ... make[4]: Entering directory

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Sedat, > > On 07/02/15 22:42, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> [ Please CC me I am not subscribed to mesa-dev and llvmdev MLs ] >> >> Hi, >> >> I already reported this when playing 1st time with my llvm-toolchain >> v3.6.0rc2 and mesa v10.3.7 [1]. >> The issue still

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 <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote: >> On 10/02/15 13:17, Dimitry Andric wrote: >>> On 09 Feb 2015, at 18:52, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Emil Velikov

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 <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> in http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19778. Tested with gcc 4.9 and clang 3.6(rc) Marc Dietrich (2): configure: add visibility macro detection to configure

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 > >> >

On 10/02/15 13:17, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On 09 Feb 2015, at 18:52, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 07/02/15 22:42, Sedat Dilek wrote: > ... >>>> In file included from ../../src/mapi/entry.c:49: >>>> ./entry_x86-64_tls.h:66:1:

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 <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 10/02/15 13:17, Dimitry Andric wrote: > >>> On 09 Feb 2015, at 18:52, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote:

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

[ Original posting see [1] ] >From [1]: ... Added: llvm/tags/RELEASE_380/rc3/ (props changed) - copied from r261685, llvm/branches/release_38/ ... The LLVM Git repositories have no "rc3" tag in "release_38" branch (as an example llvm.git#release_38 see [2]). Who is responsible for that or maybe better... can you activate the responsible(s)? Helpful is to add

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:

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

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" >

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 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 >>>

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 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