similar to: --enable-bindings=none equivalent with CMake

>> What's the correct switch? > > Is there no switch? AFAICT there is no switch to disable the bindings. If you take a look at ``cmake/config-ix.cmake`` the only conditional guarding ``find_package(Ocaml)`` is ``WIN32``. The current behaviour looks like (for both OCaml and Go) if not on Windows CMake will try to detect them and if it fails the bindings will be disabled. I'd

The purpose of this thread was to propose removing configure on January 26th. There have been no objections, so I’m assuming that timeline is acceptable. -Chris > On Jan 15, 2016, at 5:54 AM, Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 1/15/2016 5:05 AM, Daniel Sanders via llvm-dev wrote: >>> One issue that I believe has not yet been

No worries, thanks for the update. Teresa On Mon, Sep 26, 2016, 7:16 AM Carsten Mattner <carstenmattner at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> > wrote: > > > > ThinLTO needs to create as many temporary files as there are input > > modules to the link. From your 'ls' below, it doesn't look

> On Sep 16, 2016, at 4:46 PM, Carsten Mattner <carstenmattner at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 12:48 AM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com <mailto:tejohnson at google.com>> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Carsten Mattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 16,

On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 4:02 AM, Carsten Mattner <carstenmattner at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 6:41 AM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > > > > > I use trunk, but it depends on how close to the bleeding edge you > > > are

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:18 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > > Cc'ing llvm-dev again in case someone knows what is going on. > > That error is coming from a polly configure script, which I don't > have cloned into my own tree. Not sure why polly would behave > differently when configuring for ThinLTO. Does polly configure ok > when

On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 6:41 AM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Carsten Mattner <carstenmattner at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > > > > > I completely forgot to add -Wl,--gc-sections. The *-sections > > >

Is -fsplit-stack option used anywhere? My wild guess is that with ld.bfd, the thinLTO link for the DSO does not bring in morestack.o from libgcc.a, but the hidden symbol is defined in lldb binary. David On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Teresa Johnson via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Aha - finally reproduced! The difference is using ld.bfd not ld.gold. With > that I

So an iPod made in the last 4 years has not even a dsp that's used for help in low-power playback of mp3? What are my best options for a portable player I can put opus on and have 10 hours of opus playback? On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> wrote: > The vast majority of audio players do *not* have special hardware for > MP3 and Vorbis.

In uint64_t RTDyldMemoryManager::getSymbolAddressInProcess(const std::string &Name) { there is reference to morestack: #if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__) // __morestack lives in libgcc, a static library. if (&__morestack && Name == "__morestack") return (uint64_t)&__morestack; #endif #endif // __linux__ && __GLIBC__ On Mon, Oct 3,

On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Carsten Mattner <carstenmattner at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Asiri Rathnayake > <asiri.rathnayake at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Carsten Mattner via llvm-dev > > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> > >> When I tried to build with

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 6:02 PM, Ed Maste <emaste at freebsd.org> wrote: > Note that even if/when we get changes incorporated into libtool it > will still take a long time for the change to appear in new releases > of software packages using libtool. A downstream patch to the libtool > package in various operating systems or distributions doesn't really > help that much

Are there comparable presets or recommendations for opusenc vbr parameters? lame --preset standard --> opusenc ??? lame --preset extreme --> opusenc ??? I have used opusenc without custom vbr parameters and the files were much smaller than for lame's standard preset but I can't answer if that's comparable or the result was lossier in opus. Hearing tests of course show no

On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 12:32 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> On Sep 17, 2016, at 3:19 PM, Carsten Mattner <carstenmattner at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> So, when I embark on the next ThinLTO try build, probably this Sunday, >> should I append -Wl,-plugin-opt,jobs=NUM_PHYS_CORES to LDFLAGS >> and run ninja without -j or

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Sep 30, 2016, at 12:57 PM, Carsten Mattner <carstenmattner at gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Teresa

On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Mueller-Roemer, Johannes Sebastian <Johannes.Sebastian.Mueller-Roemer at igd.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > prefix = CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX > enabled-shared = BUILD_SHARED_LIBS > targets = LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD (defaults to all, or use a semicolon separated list) > disable-assertions = LLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS (obviously inverted ;) > > I don't

On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> On Sep 10, 2016, at 3:03 AM, Carsten Mattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> I tried building llvm, clang, lld, lldb from the 3.9 svn release >> branch with LTO, and some of the results were unexpected. >> >> I first tried to rebuild llvm

On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Xinliang David Li <xinliangli at gmail.com> wrote: > What is the linker command line buidling liblldb.so? is libgcc.a passed in? > There is no difference in the linker command for liblldb.so or bin/lldb between the ld.bfd and ld.gold cases, and neither links libgcc.a that I can see. The difference appears to be that the __morestack symbol is weak in

So, when I embark on the next ThinLTO try build, probably this Sunday, should I append -Wl,-plugin-opt,jobs=NUM_PHYS_CORES to LDFLAGS and run ninja without -j or -jNUM_PHYS_CORES?

On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Carsten Mattner <carstenmattner at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 5:23 AM, Carsten Mattner < > carstenmattner at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> After figuring out the fault in the configuration step and