similar to: Incorrect / missing dependencies in llvm build?

+cbieneman Mr. CMake might know how to fix it ;) Jon On 11/16/16 1:52 PM, mats petersson wrote: > Thanks, at least I know I'm not imagining or doing something really > daft! ;) > > My cmake skills are near 0%, so not sure I can fix, but perhaps I can > at least raise a bug? ;) > > -- > Mats > > On 16 November 2016 at 20:28, Martin J. O'Riordan >

I sometimes see this with a clean build and most often it is 'Attributes.inc' that is missing. I usually have to 'touch Attributes.td' for this. But I don't know CMake well enough to know how to fix these issue properly. MartinO -----Original Message----- From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Roelofs via llvm-dev Sent: 16 November

On 11/9/15 5:49 PM, John Reagan wrote: > That would be fine with me. I just don't want some new visitor to > come along and see "CMake only" and get discouraged and leave. Well, it is going to be "CMake only". Anyone who depends on autotools is going to be stuck on whatever the last revision is that we shipped with it. And I really don't see it being feasible

> On Nov 16, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote: > > > > On 11/16/16 11:48 AM, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> An issue that come up from time to time and has cost hours for debug for >> many of us and users of LLVM is that an assert build isn’t ABI >> compatible with a release build.

> On Nov 9, 2015, at 3:21 PM, Jonathan Roelofs via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On 11/9/15 4:02 PM, John Reagan via llvm-dev wrote: >> Keeping the documentation with large warnings is sufficient. It >> would at least let somebody then grab an older version's makefiles if >> they are so inclined/interested. I have no problem

You may also take a look at the ELLCC project (www.ellcc.org <http://www.ellcc.org/>). As far as I understand it they produce and package cross toolchains for a number of popular targets. - Matthias > On Aug 4, 2017, at 12:54 PM, Jonathan Roelofs via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On 8/4/17 1:14 PM, Goran Mekić via llvm-dev wrote: >> On

On 7/16/14, 6:09 PM, sgundapa wrote: > I see a couple of issues here. > > If I include .S files for ARM, the –no-integrated-as path complains about > Assembler errors. > > The integrated-as path works fine though. > These are very likely just differences between the old ARM assembler syntax and the new 'Unified' syntax. Can you use an assembler that accepts UAL

On 3/29/17 12:53 PM, Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev wrote: > Put it all together, the following error messages should work for > everybody. I'll create a patch to make this change and send it for > review. Thank you guys for the inputs! > > > Undefined symbol error: > > bin/ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: >

Hi all, An issue that come up from time to time and has cost hours for debug for many of us and users of LLVM is that an assert build isn’t ABI compatible with a release build. The CMake flags that controls this behavior is LLVM_ABI_BREAKING_CHECKS ( LLVM_ABI_BREAKING_CHECKS:STRING Used to decide if LLVM should be built with ABI breaking checks or not. Allowed values are WITH_ASSERTS (default),

Keeping the documentation with large warnings is sufficient. It would at least let somebody then grab an older version's makefiles if they are so inclined/interested. I have no problem with you yanking the files, just the fact that older versions did have configure/makefiles. I only spoke up when I saw the suggestion for removing the online documentation. John -----Original Message-----

Folks, I'm trying to set up a libc++ buildbot on ARM and I found an inconsistency which I'm not sure how to fix. I got a build error like this: libc++abi.so: undefined reference to `_Unwind_GetGR' Since I expected that the symbol would be provided by that library, I searched the CMake on libc++abi and found this: option(LIBCXXABI_USE_LLVM_UNWINDER "Build and use the LLVM

On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 08:22:24AM -0600, Jonathan Roelofs wrote: > IIUC, you don't want to cross compile llvm itself (which is what those > instructions are for), but instead you want to *use* llvm to cross compile > things. > > To build your sysroot, you'll need to cross-build: > > 1) A libc. Good choices for that for baremetal are: newlib or musl. > 2)

I am late on the thread, but I just want to say that the new format looks awesome! Thanks, Rafael On 29 March 2017 at 15:18, Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > My bad. I intended this. > > Undefined symbol error: > > bin/ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: > lld::elf::EhFrameSection<llvm::object::ELFType<(llvm::support::endianness)0, >

I have noticed that LLVM doesn't seem to "like" large functions, as a general rule. Admittedly, my experience is similar with gcc, so I'm not sure it's something that can be easily fixed. And I'm probably sounding like a broken record, because I have said this before. My experience is that the time it takes to compile something is growing above linear with size of

On 1/30/15 1:17 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool wrote: > Although this has been discussed in the past, I think that given a few > conversations, it seems that it unfortunately needs to be brought up again. > > There seems to be some disagreement over the ideal location of the > unwinder (libunwind). Currently, libunwind resides in a subdirectory of > libc++abi. There seems to be some

On 6/1/15 6:42 PM, Chris Bieneman wrote: > Looping in cfe-dev because I should have send this there too from the > start. > > -Chris > >> On Jun 1, 2015, at 3:21 PM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> >> wrote: >> >> LLVMDev, >> >> PR 15732 is the umbrella tracking the progress of making the CMake >> build system feature equivalent to

Now that the commit of... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r236534 | achurbanov | 2015-05-05 16:02:52 -0400 (Tue, 05 May 2015) | 13 lines Integrate libiomp CMake into LLVM CMake build system. This patch integrates the libiomp CMake build system into the LLVM CMake build system so that users can checkout libiomp into the projects directory of llvm and

So I started prototyping remote testing for libcxx over the weekend: https://github.com/jroelofs/libcxx/tree/remote_test The SSHExecutor isn't quite finished yet, but this should give an idea of what I've got in mind. Does this look generic enough to work for other projects under the llvm-umbrella (LNT, test-suite, compiler_rt, libcxxabi, etc)? Are there use cases that you see

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:14 PM, Simon Atanasyan <simon at atanasyan.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Probably you get the error because you try to build LLVM in the source > code directory. Create a separate folder, cd to this folder and run > the configure script. > > $ mkdir llvm-bld > $ cd llvm-bld > $ ../<llvm src>/configure --enable-targets=mips > $ make >

By that logic we shouldn't have an 80 column limit in LLVM :) On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:35 PM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote: > >> When the line is like 400 characters, it's pretty obnoxious. >> > > > I guess I'd need to see the particular situation, but