similar to: [lldb-dev] Updates on SVN to GitHub migration

It'd be nice to know what about our repository is breaking it. Do they have any idea what that is? For example -- I think that we probably will want to archive+discard many of the random branches and tags currently in the repository. If the large number of branches and tags is breaking it, then maybe it just starts working after we do so. On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 3:53 PM Anton Korobeynikov

Isn’t the checkout a local operation that should not involved GitHub ? Did you mean the clone operation ? And about sparse-checkout, I though they require a full clone of the repository anyway. Is there a way to do a partial clone only ? Note: If you don’t need the whole history local, you may perform a swallow clone (using —depth 1). > Le 9 nov. 2018 à 01:02, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev

On 2018-09-20 10:01, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev wrote: > Yes, it's a manual process. The binaries are build and tested by > volunteers, and the set of folks who volunteers differs a little > between releases. I would assume LLVM has some kind of CI infrastructure. That should be able to build the release binaries. > The pre-built binaries are really mostly for users who want to

On 2018-09-19 18:25, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev wrote: > Hi Hans, > > Thanks a lot for the effort. > I'm curious if binaries for other systems will appear there (Ubuntu, macOS)? > > Also, more general question: > I see that different releases have different sets of pre-built binaries, > so I'm curious what are the reasons behind? I'm a bit curious as well. I

Here's another question about the current status of this. It's close to two months after the official monorepo was supposed to be published. Can someone give an update? Is this on hold indefinitely? Are there concrete issues that people are working on and this will happen as soon as those are resolved? At the least, I'm assuming the "SVN will shut down 1 year from now"

On 2016-07-20 00:16, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev wrote: > Sure, "running a decent and stable web service is not a simple task”, that’s what I’m saying. Perhaps Travis CI could be used. They support triggering builds using an API [1]. [1] https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/triggering-builds -- /Jacob Carlborg

This is strange and everything is fast for me. Let's continue off-list. On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Jacob Carlborg via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 2018-01-17 12:29, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev wrote: >> >> Which URL ? > > > They all seem to be slow. But here's one example: > >

On 2017-12-30 21:27, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev wrote: > Hello > > We are not planning to use git tags there (at least until the git > migration would happen). Please use the release branches. To me it doesn't matter if it's a tag or a branch, but, as far as I can see, there are no branches for point releases. For example, there's a branch release_50, but no branch

On 2019-10-29 01:21, Reid Kleckner via llvm-dev wrote: > At the dev meeting I heard Doug Gregor say something like, "what kind of > dirty animals are you, you just push directly to master!?" Based on > that, I think other communities may set up workflows where they push > branches to places, and some automation rebases and updates master > asynchronously, optionally

On 2018-01-17 12:29, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev wrote: > Which URL ? They all seem to be slow. But here's one example: https://releases.llvm.org/4.0.0/clang+llvm-4.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz -- /Jacob Carlborg

On 2018-01-10 17:26, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev wrote: > Strange. Some of the files work for me, and some get the error message > you showed. I had a problem with the following files seven hours ago when my build failed. http://releases.llvm.org/3.9.0/clang+llvm-3.9.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz http://releases.llvm.org/3.9.1/clang+llvm-3.9.1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz

On 2018-01-15 22:45, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev wrote: > This should be fixed as of now. I just tried again, it takes over 60 seconds to get a reply. -- /Jacob Carlborg

I've noticed that there are no tags in any of the Git mirrors [1], [2] or [3]. Would it be possible to add the tags? [1] https://git.llvm.org/git/llvm.git [2] https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm [3] https://github.com/llvm-project/llvm-project-20170507 -- /Jacob Carlborg

On 2017-09-08 14:33, Brian Cain via llvm-dev wrote: > > Hans, > > Sorry it's a little late -- I got a request for ubuntu x86_64. > > Uploaded clang+llvm-5.0.0-linux-x86_64-ubuntu16.04.tar.xz and > clang+llvm-5.0.0-linux-x86_64-ubuntu14.04.tar.xz This one has a different name than all the other releases :(. The other releases are named

I just ran into this again: $ wget http://releases.llvm.org/4.0.0/clang+llvm-4.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-debian8.tar.xz --2018-02-05 13:40:00-- http://releases.llvm.org/4.0.0/clang+llvm-4.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-debian8.tar.xz Resolving releases.llvm.org (releases.llvm.org)... 151.101.122.49 Connecting to releases.llvm.org (releases.llvm.org)|151.101.122.49|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting

On 2013-07-24 09:47, Tyler Hardin wrote: > Not much slower. VBox does an amazing job at getting near native > performance on modern machines (those with nested paging etc.). This is > definitely the best option if your computer has ~2g ram and 2+ cores. > Give the Ubuntu VM 2g and 1 (maybe 2) core/s and it should be fine. At work, it takes significantly longer to boot our Ruby on

Jacob, We believe the issue is fixed now. Could you please confirm? On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 11:41 AM, Jacob Carlborg via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 2018-01-10 17:26, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev wrote: >> >> Strange. Some of the files work for me, and some get the error message >> you showed. > > > I had a problem with the following files

On Jul 24, 2013 2:52 AM, "Jacob Carlborg" <doob at me.com> wrote: > > Do your LLVM development on Mac OS X :) Should work well. Apple is one of the bigger supporters of LLVM, so I'd hope OS X would be a suitable dev platform. > It depends on what your needs are. Using VirtualBox will probably be the easiest. It also allows you to run both Mac OS X and Ubuntu

On 2018-01-13 21:08, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev wrote: > Jacob, > > We believe the issue is fixed now. Could you please confirm? It's still taking between 5 and 22 seconds to get a reply. -- /Jacob Carlborg

On 2013-12-04 08:22, Bill Wendling wrote: > The LLVM 3.4rc2 binaries are now available for testing! Please download them and compile and test things. See if it breaks your code! Please file bugs for any issues you encounter. At this point, we’re only accepting fixes for regressions from 3.3. Cool. For convenience, here are the links http://llvm.org/pre-releases/3.4/rc2 -- /Jacob Carlborg