similar to: Phabricator sending spurious "This revision was not accepted when it landed" emails

On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:07 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > +Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> who's taking some (shared?) > ownership of Phabricator these days. > > Mehdi - was Phab updated recently (such that we might've picked up new > semantics)? > No: I upgraded the hardware and the OS, but not Phab itself yet. I have a test

I followed a link from LLVM Weekly to http://reviews.llvm.org/rL207598 and got: " Still Importing... This commit is still importing. Changes will be visible once the import finishes. " It was committed a week ago. Is something wrong with Phabricator? Thanks, Jay.

On 11 May 2014 13:25, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org> wrote: > On 6 May 2014 09:42, Jay Foad <jay.foad at gmail.com> wrote: >> I followed a link from LLVM Weekly to http://reviews.llvm.org/rL207598 and got: >> >> " >> Still Importing... >> >> This commit is still importing. Changes will be visible once the >> import finishes.

How about tweaking the compiler-rt cmakefiles so that if lsan is not supported, the target check-lsan still exists but does nothing? I've attached a patch that does this. (I don't know much about cmake so there might be a better way of doing it.) Alternatively, can I change the zorg build script so that "run sanitizer tests in gcc build" doesn't try to run check-lsan etc

On 7 July 2011 18:41, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Jay Foad <jay.foad at gmail.com> wrote: >> 2. Even some simple C cases fail, e.g.: >> >> struct S; >> extern struct T { >>  struct S (*p)(void); >> } t; >> struct S { int i; }; >> void g(void) { >>  t.p(); >> } >>

An update on the type-system-rewrite branch (http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/branches/type-system-rewrite/): It's now to the point where it passes all regression tests all of single source (and most of externals/multisource) when using an LLVM 2.9 version of clang to compile programs to a rbc file. I have what looks like one more subtle type mapping bug to track down, which will

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Jay Foad <jay.foad at gmail.com> wrote: >> 1. Clang - Jay, do you have a patch for this? > > Yes. It's good enough to build most of LLVM+Clang, except for a couple > of files. But I'm running out of time and expertise to be able to fix > the remaining bits. Some specific concerns: > > 1. Many Objective-C(++) tests fail, because

On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 11:43 AM Nikita Popov via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 11:22 AM Zachary Turner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> What this means for LLVM is that everyone will have to completely stop using history rewriting operations. No more rebase, squash, amend, etc. > > This is also incorrect. Most

Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> writes: > I'll go ahead and file one though - more and more people are using phab > for llvm, so the problems with it are coming up more and more often. https://secure.phabricator.com/T8269

Hi all, phabricator seems to have stopped sending emails. All other functionality is ok, it just does not send email notifications of any actions. Does anyone know what's the problem? cheers, pavel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170410/8ce9ec7c/attachment.html>

This has been going on since at least Friday too. On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 7:45 AM Manuel Klimek via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:18 PM Pavel Labath <labath at google.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> phabricator seems to have stopped sending emails. All other functionality >> is ok, it just does not

Dear all, I just created this revision <https://reviews.llvm.org/D34937> but I did not receive any email for it even though it says 'Automatically Subscribed' on the right. Also, even my profile shows no trace of the aforementioned revision. It shows that my last activity was on 24th May. Additionally, just to verify that I am not receiving any emails from Phabricator, I logged

On 5/19/15 7:02 PM, Matthias Braun wrote: > They happen for things like closing a revision, adding dependencies or subscribers. But I agree that they are pretty useless because they don't actually mention the action that triggered the mail but just contain the accompanying comment which may be empty. Last time I brought this up, I was pointed at Phabricator's Phabricator as the place

On Oct 20, 2009, at 5:49 AM, Jay Foad wrote: >> To test clang: >> 1) Compile llvm and clang from source. > > LLVM fails to build for me on Cygwin. I get: > Does TOT build? If not, please file a bug. Unfortunately Cygwin is not in our release criteria. I'd like to have a buildbot running (if there is not one already) and then get someone to qualify it for the

> 1. Clang - Jay, do you have a patch for this? Yes. It's good enough to build most of LLVM+Clang, except for a couple of files. But I'm running out of time and expertise to be able to fix the remaining bits. Some specific concerns: 1. Many Objective-C(++) tests fail, because they use implicitly defined structs for various ObjC runtime data structures; the ASTConsumer

> To test clang: > 1) Compile llvm and clang from source. LLVM fails to build for me on Cygwin. I get: make[1]: Entering directory `/home/foad/llvm/objdir-2.6/runtime' make[2]: Entering directory `/home/foad/llvm/objdir-2.6/runtime/libprofile' llvm[2]: Compiling BasicBlockTracing.c for Release build (PIC) llvm[2]: Compiling BlockProfiling.c for Release build (PIC) llvm[2]:

On Oct 20, 2009, at 12:05 PM, Aaron Gray wrote: > 2009/10/20 Tanya Lattner <lattner at apple.com>: >> >> On Oct 20, 2009, at 5:49 AM, Jay Foad wrote: >> >>>> To test clang: >>>> 1) Compile llvm and clang from source. >>> >>> LLVM fails to build for me on Cygwin. I get: >>> >> >> Does TOT build? If not,

2009/10/20 Tanya Lattner <lattner at apple.com>: > > On Oct 20, 2009, at 5:49 AM, Jay Foad wrote: > >>> To test clang: >>> 1) Compile llvm and clang from source. >> >> LLVM fails to build for me on Cygwin. I get: >> > > Does TOT build? If not, please file a bug. No. Theres the runtime install bug (below), and llvm-gcc has a bug that I

Hi, Currently the first stage ("run sanitizer tests in gcc build") of the sanitizer-ppc64-linux1 buildbot is only failing because of: + cd clang_build + make -j16 check-lsan make: *** No rule to make target `check-lsan'. Stop. + echo @@@STEP_FAILURE@@@ @@@STEP_FAILURE@@@ + cd clang_build + make -j16 check-msan make: *** No rule to make target `check-msan'. Stop. + echo

Hi Manuel, It's been brought to my attention that my usage of the Phabricator Audit tool to track which commits have been reviewed is causing a large number of (almost) empty emails to be sent to the commit authors and anyone else added to the audit as a reviewer. Presumably there are some state change emails that we haven't blocked yet (e.g. the 'Accept commit' and 'Resign