similar to: Reverting to nouveau

Clang does indeed built it with one warning. [ 55%] Building C object lib/CMakeFiles/CompilerRT-Common.dir/gcc_personality_v0.c.o /export/home/edward/lab/llvm/build/compiler-rt/lib/gcc_personality_v0.c:232:36: warning: implicit declaration of function '__builtin_eh_return_data_regno' is invalid in C99 [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] _Unwind_SetGR(context,

Seems pretty clear cut to me. #if defined(HAVE_OSATOMIC_COMPARE_AND_SWAP_INT) && defined (HAVE_OSATOMIC_COMPARE_AND_SWAP_LONG) ... #elif defined(__WIN32__) ... #elif defined(HAVE_SYNC_BOOL_COMPARE_AND_SWAP_INT) && defined (HAVE_SYNC_BOOL_COMPARE_AND_SWAP_LONG) ... #else #error unknown atomic compare-and-swap primitive #endif The problem isn't mismatched #if/#endif. The

On Nov 12, 2009, at 10:25 AM, Edward O'Callaghan wrote: > No, its up to them which backend they want to use. > Sounds like they think that GCC is super quick compared to LLVM. Looks > like another fud fart out of google to me. Edward, this is no place for comments like this. Evan > > 2009/11/12 Jon McLachlan <mclachlan at apple.com>: >> Any plans to make LLVM

Good day Tanya, I would just like to clarify this for myself and a few other people who maybe wondering, Does this code freeze apply to; * Clang. * Compiler-RT. Thanks for your time, Best Regards, Edward O'Callaghan. 2009/8/17 Tanya Lattner <lattner at apple.com>: > LLVMers, > > The 2.6 code freeze is this friday, August 21, at 9pm PDT. > > All major changes should

No, As it worked fine before. I can't see the #if that goes with +#elif defined(__WIN32__) as you removed -#if TARGET_OS_MAC. Please go over your #if / #endif blocks and trail the #endif with a comment. I am willing to bet there is a problem there. Thanks for your time, Edward. 2009/9/23 Shantonu Sen <ssen at apple.com>: > Sounds like your system compiler doesn't support

Sounds like your system compiler doesn't support gcc-style builtin atomics. Please use a different compiler? Shantonu Sent from my MacBook On Sep 22, 2009, at 7:54 PM, Edward O'Callaghan wrote: > Breaks Builds on Solaris and AuroraUX with: > > bash-3.2$ make > Scanning dependencies of target BlocksRuntime > [ 1%] Building C object

Hi All, I'm using samba 3.0.10-1 on RedHat Enterprise Linux 4. I'm authentication to our PDC using Winbind and also mounting our home directory share (from Windows) onto our main Linux server such that when a user logs on to the Linux server, their Windows home directory is mounted also. I'm using the domain admin account to mount the home directory share, which I feel is

Good day, I been working on the CMake build system (which is nice and portable) + code clean ups over the whole Compiler-RT software suit. I recently added Blocks to the CMake build system but there is some ugly looking warnings I need to fix up in the Blocks code which I have not had time to look into yet. N.B. The CMake build system is not complete yet due to my lack of time, however I am still

No, its up to them which backend they want to use. Sounds like they think that GCC is super quick compared to LLVM. Looks like another fud fart out of google to me. 2009/11/12 Jon McLachlan <mclachlan at apple.com>: > Any plans to make LLVM work with Google's new language, Go? > >

screw that site, its useless info run by a linux gnu zealot. 2009/9/14 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: > On Sep 14, 2009, at 3:20 AM, Stefano Delli Ponti wrote: > >> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php? >> page=article&item=apple_llvm_gcc&num=1 > > Unfortunately, they don't specify what flags are used, what > architecture is compiled for etc.

Breaks Builds on Solaris and AuroraUX with: bash-3.2$ make Scanning dependencies of target BlocksRuntime [ 1%] Building C object BlocksRuntime/CMakeFiles/BlocksRuntime.dir/runtime.c.o /export/home/edward/lab/llvm/build/compiler-rt/BlocksRuntime/runtime.c:77:2: error: #error unknown atomic compare-and-swap primitive /export/home/edward/lab/llvm/build/compiler-rt/BlocksRuntime/runtime.c: In

The Blocks language and implementation specifications are checked into clang/docs. More generally, on Mac OS X, the blocks runtime is linked into the C library ("libSystem"), and available to the entire OS. Clients that create blocks may implicitly get compiler-generated calls to some of the runtime functions, and the developer may also make explicit calls to, e.g.,

Good day Nathan, If your using the stock GCC with Solaris, I am sorry to inform you its broken, Please see: http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#brokengcc Please be warned as your get miss compiles and things will do strange `stuff`. As can be seen here, the reverse is true for both the GNU binutils and XPG4 versions of `nm' : -bash-3.2$ /usr/xpg4/bin/nm -p -u `find . -name

Hi, I took the advice of Daniel O'Connor, found out what variables I had available to me, and put them in the conf. So now it looks like : [ellipse] driver = mge-shut port = /dev/cuaa0 desc = "UPS" lowbatt = 5 offdelay = 120 let the UPS charge up fully, 24 hours. I plugged a single lamp into it, with a 60W bulb. At 3:40p

Good day all, Initial Ada bindings have been introduced for the LLVM 2.6 release. Unfortunately no one was able/had time to help me better integrate it into the LLVM build system. Thus, It has been left with a GPR Ada project file for building the bindings, anyone using the Ada bindings will know what this is and how to handle it. However, in future as these bindings improve/progress. We should

Hi Jordan, I've committed my changes to hook up the BlocksRuntime/ subdirectory of compiler-rt, using CMake. The cmake build process is documented at <http://llvm.org/docs/CMake.html > More specifically, to use this support on FreeBSD, for example, you would do: 1) Install cmake (<http://www.cmake.org/>), add it to your PATH 2) Check out the source code for llvm and clang

2009/9/14 Edward O'Callaghan <eocallaghan at auroraux.org>: > screw that site, its useless info run by a linux gnu zealot. Well, being a Linux GNU zealot doesn't invalidate numbers. What does invalidate is that he has no numbers! He just fired a few applications and counted the seconds, this is utterly pointless. No reference to how many times he ran, standard deviations,

On Nov 12, 2009, at 10:25 AM, Edward O'Callaghan wrote: > No, its up to them which backend they want to use. > Sounds like they think that GCC is super quick compared to LLVM. Looks > like another fud fart out of google to me. Actually, after chatting with Ian about it, it's more of a case of the FAQ being poorly worded than them being anti-LLVM. If you read it closely, it says

There's an Apple internal bug for that. I've cloned it to Bugzilla as: <http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=5034> Implement __builtin_eh_return_data_regno() I can probably make the cmake configure stage fail up front if none of the supported mechanisms are found. I'll look at that. Thanks for the feedback! Shantonu Sent from my MacBook On Sep 22, 2009, at 9:01 PM,

LLVMers, The 2.6 code freeze is this friday, August 21, at 9pm PDT. All major changes should be checked into SVN at this time. Please monitor the buildbots closely for any failures. I ask you to be very cautious with what you commit to svn over the next few days. This is not the time to be adding experimental code :) Please help us keep LLVM as stable as possible over the next few days.