similar to: [3.9 Release] LLD's release notes

Dear everyone, It's time for the release notes nagging email. We have release notes for LLVM, Clang, clang-tools-extra, lld, and Polly. (If there are more, please let me know.) Most of these are pretty empty files; see e.g. the LLVM one at [1]. The internet does read these notes when we release, so please help make them informative! If you made any interesting changes during the past six

We're very very close to the final release. Source and binaries for LLVM-3.9.0-rc3 are available at http://llvm.org/pre-releases/3.9.0/#rc3 This release candidate is almost the same as rc2, with the following additional commits: r279224 - Minor change to OpenCL release notes r279260 - [lld] Add a note that 3.9 is a major milestone for us r279468, r279474 - Fix gather-root.ll SLP vectorizer

Hans, Are these new RC3 Windows binaries now with asserts disabled? Kind Regards Dan From: Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev<mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> Sent: 26 August 2016 22:30 To: llvm-dev<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>; cfe-dev<mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>; LLDB Dev<mailto:lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org>; openmp-dev (openmp-dev at

Yeah, it seems that the time the mirror was created there were no release branches and therefore nothing was exported :) On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Martell Malone via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> I am currently trying to test out a few things

On 28 October 2016 at 17:41, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > There's also -fuse-ld= > > That's how I usually do it. Right, that gets rid of the override flag. Thanks! :) But the arguments about the default and the cross-compilation error still stand. cheers, --renato

I'm sorry, but I don't think LLDB has any release notes. On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Kamil Rytarowski <n54 at gmx.com> wrote: > LLDB: > > Switched the NetBSD platform to new remote tracing capable framework. > > Preliminary support for tracing NetBSD(/amd64) processes and core files > with a single thread. > > On 25.08.2017 02:44, Hans Wennborg via

Dear everyone, We're getting close to the 6.0.0 release, but the release notes are still in a pretty bad state. You can see the notes for rc2 here: http://prereleases.llvm.org/6.0.0/#rc2 (a few things have been added since). When the release happens, a lot of people will look at the notes, so it's a good opportunity to mention the work that's happened in the past six months. If you

cmake ../llvm/ -G "Unix Makefiles" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE="Debug" -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../install -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD="XXX" -DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS='lld;clang;' ________________________________ From: Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 2:21 AM To: Josh Sharp Cc: Brian Cain; via llvm-dev Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] LLVM 8.0.0

Dear everyone, There's still plenty of time left, but I'd like to get the schedule set before folks start disappearing for the holidays. Note that this release will also switch us to the new versioning scheme where the major version is incremented for each major release (i.e., when the 4.0 branch is created, trunk will become 5.0). If you'd like to help providing binaries and

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Renato Golin via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I'm creating a bootstrap buildbot on AArch64 with LLD and I just > realised the "accepted" way to make clang call lld is to "symlink lld > -> ld". I understand that's how every Linux system "chooses" the > linker, but that makes deployment and

+Rui and Peter On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 8:34 AM, Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Here's a fix: > > --- a/lld/COFF/Driver.cpp > +++ b/lld/COFF/Driver.cpp > @@ -72,6 +72,9 @@ bool link(ArrayRef<const char *> Args, bool CanExitEarly, > raw_ostream &Diag) { > exitLld(errorCount() ? 1 : 0); > > freeArena(); > +

Hello testers, 4.0.0-rc2 was just tagged from the branch at r294535. There are still open relase blocking bugs and merge requests, so this will not be the last release candidate, but we've had a lot of merges since the last one, and I'd like to see what the testing looks like. The test-release.sh script was updated to also include lld. Make sure you're using the latest version of

Dear everyone, The in-progress release notes for 3.7 [1,2] make it look like we didn't do very much over the past six months. Obviously that's not the case at all, so let's get them in shape! If you've been thinking "I should probably add this to the release notes at some point", now is the time :-) I have a list below of changes that might be worth mentioning. I

On 28 October 2016 at 16:54, Renato Golin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 28 October 2016 at 17:41, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >> There's also -fuse-ld= >> >> That's how I usually do it. > > Right, that gets rid of the override flag. Thanks! :) > > But the arguments about the default and the

You're not the only one Hans, my VMs have started crashing my host OS :) Fedora and OpenSUSE look good, binaries uploaded. On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > 3.5.1-rc1 has been tagged, so it is time to begin testing. We

Thanks, Brian I tried enabling both the lld and the clang projects by adding -DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS='lld;clang' into the cmake command. After the build completed successfully, I can see ld.lld in my bin folder but not clang. Is it supposed to be in another folder? Thanks. ________________________________ From: Brian Cain <brian.cain at gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2019

Hypothetically assume that we have an LLVM release X and want to rename variables in the next major release Y. In order to backport patches from Y to X.1 smoothly, I think we could first apply the automated renaming tool to X and then cherry-pick patches from Y. The obvious issue of doing this is, even though X.1 is a dot release, a very large number of lines would be changed from X, though. On

As I mentioned in the thread (to many people who don't have time to read the discussions), pushing https://reviews.llvm.org/D84825 restores the original behavior. The same effect as one would get by reverting all related patches. If someone gives me an approval, I'll push it immediately. I already get verbal LGTM from Peter. > With respect I think the "request for changes"

Hello everyone, I know 7.0.1 isn't out the door yet, and 8.0.0 isn't due for a while, so relax :-) But I would like to get the schedule decided before folks disappear over the holidays. According to the usual schedule, the branch would be created two weeks into January, with the goal of shipping early March, so this is my proposal: - 16 January 2019: Create the 8.0.0 branch, RC1 tagged

Dear testers, 8.0.0-rc2 has been tagged from the release_80 branch at r353413. Please run the test script, share your results, and upload binaries. I'll get the source tarballs and docs published as soon as possible, and binaries as they become available. Thanks, Hans