similar to: [LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?"

2016 Jun 26
0
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
Sedat, What you're probably missing is that 3.8.1 is made in release_38 branch. So, everything is there and already mirrored. Source tarballs will be available upon the release. On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Tom, Hi Anton, > > the first I had in mind was... > "Another (LLVM/CLang) realease - a new drama!"
2016 Jun 27
0
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote: >>>> What you're probably missing is that 3.8.1 is made in release_38 >>>> branch. So, everything is there and already mirrored. >>>> >>>> Source tarballs will be available upon the release. >>> Which are just coming, now that final has been
2016 Jun 27
5
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
Please have a look at the dedicated mailing list: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-branch-commits/ Please wait for the official release to happen, you will then find tarballs on llvm.org. They will also contain correct version strings, though I haven't yet tried building from the SVN branches directly. Maybe you need to use the SVN tags, $ clang --version currently gives me "clang
2016 Jun 27
2
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
>>> What you're probably missing is that 3.8.1 is made in release_38 >>> branch. So, everything is there and already mirrored. >>> >>> Source tarballs will be available upon the release. >> Which are just coming, now that final has been tested successfully. :) >> They'll be announced in the list and available here: >>
2016 Jul 12
3
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
The source tarball for clang-tools-extra-3.9.0.src.tar.xz is also missing as well from http://llvm.org/releases/3.8.1/. Jack On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 7:34 AM, Sedat Dilek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > There is no compiler-rt v3.8.1 source tarball available on > <http://llvm.org/releases/3.8.1/>. > > - Sedat - > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at
2016 Jun 26
3
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
On 26 June 2016 at 13:31, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > What you're probably missing is that 3.8.1 is made in release_38 > branch. So, everything is there and already mirrored. > > Source tarballs will be available upon the release. Which are just coming, now that final has been tested successfully. :) They'll be announced in the
2016 Jun 27
0
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 26 June 2016 at 13:31, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> What you're probably missing is that 3.8.1 is made in release_38 >> branch. So, everything is there and already mirrored. >> >> Source tarballs will be available upon the
2016 Jun 27
0
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Hahnfeld, Jonas <Hahnfeld at itc.rwth-aachen.de> wrote: > Please have a look at the dedicated mailing list: > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-branch-commits/ > OK, I clicked the offline version of that ML on the main-page of <llvm.org>, so I knew of it. Anyway, I think most people use Git these days. > Please wait for the official
2016 Jun 27
2
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
> Can you answer my question on how to set the version-string correct > when generating tarballs out of the release_38 Git branch? > ( I generated source-tarballs out of my local Git repositories, see below. ) [ llvm.src/CMakeLists.txt ] ... if(NOT DEFINED LLVM_VERSION_MAJOR) set(LLVM_VERSION_MAJOR 3) endif() if(NOT DEFINED LLVM_VERSION_MINOR) set(LLVM_VERSION_MINOR 8) endif() if(NOT
2016 Jul 13
2
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 04:48:51PM +0200, Sedat Dilek via llvm-dev wrote: > [ CCed all people who were involved in this thread ] > > Hi Tom, > > personally, I am interested to test the prebuilt-toolchains for > Ubuntu/xenial alias 16.04 LTS and Debian/Jessie v8.5.0 AMD64. > The available toolchains are incomplete and thus useless. > > Just as a fact: There is still no
2016 Jun 27
2
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
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
2016 Jun 27
0
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
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
2016 Jun 27
0
[LLVM/Clang v3.8.1] Missing Git branches/tags and source-tarballs?
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 autotools build any more. The official releases are made using CMake and most of the buildbots are using it. Feel free
2016 Feb 24
3
[3.8 Release] RC3 has been tagged
[ 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
2016 Jul 21
3
[llvm-toolchain v3.8.1] LTO: Linking clang hangs with ld.gold and LLVMgold.so plugin
Hi, unfortunately, my build somehow hangs when linking clang binary and my system is in an unusable state. My toolchain is clang-3.8, gold-1.11 and LLVMgold.so from binutils v2.26.1 (both selfmade) and LTO-flag is enabled. My buildsystem uses cmake-3.6.0 and ninja-1.7.1 (both prebuilt). I have 52 last steps left in my 3rd build. My Linux-kernel is v3.13.0-92 from official Ubuntu repositories.
2016 Feb 24
4
[3.8 Release] RC3 has been tagged
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
2016 Jul 23
2
[llvm-toolchain v3.8.1] LTO: Linking clang hangs with ld.gold and LLVMgold.so plugin
How big is your project? LTO eats RAM even faster than chrome. For example linking clang with LTO could take 16GB of ram. Have you tried using LTO on your project on that machine, or is it your first time? Piotr On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Sedat Dilek via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at
2018 Aug 27
2
LLVM/Clang/Compiler-RT tarballs version 7.0.0rc2
Hi, I have seen you tagged 7.0.0rc2 in SVN, but [1] has no tarballs for downloading? Can you please provide them? Thanks in advance. Regards, - Sedat - [1] http://prereleases.llvm.org/7.0.0/#rc2 [2] https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-branch-commits/2018-August/date.html
2016 Jul 23
3
[llvm-toolchain v3.8.1] LTO: Linking clang hangs with ld.gold and LLVMgold.so plugin
> On Jul 23, 2016, at 1:53 PM, Sedat Dilek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Piotr Padlewski <prazek at google.com <mailto:prazek at google.com>> wrote: >> How big is your project? >> LTO eats RAM even faster than chrome. For example linking clang with LTO >>
2018 Aug 27
3
LLVM/Clang/Compiler-RT tarballs version 7.0.0rc2
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