similar to: functions and getting them into R

Dear All, Many thanks to those who replied to my query about getting functions into "R". I have another problem that I hope is as easy to solve as the last one. I want to install the package Tree on my system and have no idea how to go about it. Any help would be gratefully received Guy ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Guy J. Forrester

Hi, For anyone who might be interested, I've thrown together a little page to track my builds of llvm and clang, both release 3.0 and svn-trunk, on powerpc-darwin8. http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/ I'll update the list of logs each time I svn-update and build. It's nowhere as nice as a real buildbot page, but it's better than nothing. 3.0 still has over 20 test

18.01.2012, 02:46, "David Fang" <fang at csl.cornell.edu>: > Hi, >          For anyone who might be interested, I've thrown together a little > page to track my builds of llvm and clang, both release 3.0 and > svn-trunk, on powerpc-darwin8. > > http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/ > > I'll update the list of logs each time I svn-update and

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:51:38PM +0400, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > > > 18.01.2012, 02:46, "David Fang" <fang at csl.cornell.edu>: > > Hi, > > ?????????For anyone who might be interested, I've thrown together a little > > page to track my builds of llvm and clang, both release 3.0 and > > svn-trunk, on powerpc-darwin8. > > > >

Hi, Thanks for the quick reply again. > On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, David Fang <fang at csl.cornell.edu> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've bootstrapped llvm/clang from svn-trunk on powerpc-darwin8 (g++-4.0.1), and >> have the following test results to share. >> Summary below, full log at: >>

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, David Fang <fang at csl.cornell.edu> wrote: > Hi, > > I've bootstrapped llvm/clang from svn-trunk on powerpc-darwin8 (g++-4.0.1), and > have the following test results to share. > Summary below, full log at: > http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/r146586-powerpc-darwin8-results.txt > > The only edits required were those I

Hi, > ----- Original Message ----- >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> Hi all, >>>> My recent commit r187027 fixed a simple oversight of forgetting >>>> to >>>> check for __ppc__ (only checking __powerpc__), which broke my >>>> powerpc-apple-darwin8 stage1 tests, since the system gcc only >>>> provided

On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 01:51:57AM -0500, David Fang wrote: > Hi, > Thanks for the quick reply again. > >> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, David Fang <fang at csl.cornell.edu> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've bootstrapped llvm/clang from svn-trunk on powerpc-darwin8 (g++-4.0.1), and >>> have the following test results to share. >>>

Hi, I've bootstrapped llvm/clang from svn-trunk on powerpc-darwin8 (g++-4.0.1), and have the following test results to share. Summary below, full log at: http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/r146586-powerpc-darwin8-results.txt The only edits required were those I posted to llvm-commits yesterday (re: "some missing clang libs"). And I also edited LitConfig.py to point to

> ----- Original Message ----- >> Hi all, >> My recent commit r187027 fixed a simple oversight of forgetting to >> check for __ppc__ (only checking __powerpc__), which broke my >> powerpc-apple-darwin8 stage1 tests, since the system gcc only >> provided >> __ppc__. I was wondering if this justifies using simpler macros like >> >> #define

----- Original Message ----- > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> Hi all, > >> My recent commit r187027 fixed a simple oversight of forgetting > >> to > >> check for __ppc__ (only checking __powerpc__), which broke my > >> powerpc-apple-darwin8 stage1 tests, since the system gcc only > >> provided > >> __ppc__. I was

This works great. > You can also try using the gllvm wrapper: https://github.com/SRI-CSL/gllvm ; it's quite reliable and easy to use in my experience. Just to be sure. Only one version of bc file will be generated that corresponds to the compiler options provide at configure? The original approach using ld.gold will provide several .bc files that correspond to different stages of the

Hi all, My recent commit r187027 fixed a simple oversight of forgetting to check for __ppc__ (only checking __powerpc__), which broke my powerpc-apple-darwin8 stage1 tests, since the system gcc only provided __ppc__. I was wondering if this justifies using simpler macros like #define LLVM_PPC (defined(__ppc__) || defined(__powerpc__) ...) #define LLVM_PPC64 (defined(__ppc64__) ||

>> These results have far fewer failures than svn-trunk, and are also >> comparable to bootstrapping with gcc-4.6.2, summarized here: >> http://paste.lisp.org/display/126363 >> (Unfortunately, I no longer have the whole build/test log for the gcc46 bootstrap.) >> This consistency between different bootstraps of the release gives me >> some hope that g++-4.0.1 is

Hi, according to cluster file system logic and from my testing experience on other FS, the more nodes add into clustered file system, the more performance degradation it will have, two questions: 1. Is it possible to tune ocfs2 so that the performance issue wouldn't be a breakdown problem? 2. How many cluster nodes do you guys experience will have major performance issue? The fs we use is 90%

Hi John, My project is somewhat inbetween, but closer to the latter. If you are doing something related to synthesis, have you checked xPilot from UCLA? Search "llvm" in this paper <http://www.icims.csl.uiuc.edu/~dchen/xpilot-TechCon2005.pdf> Anyway, thanks for the information! :-) Wenhao On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 6:30 AM, <llvmdev-request at cs.uiuc.edu> wrote: > >

Hi, I havea minor suggestion for http://llvm.org/docs/TestingGuide.html: Under 'Requirements', might be worth mentioning that running the basic llvm/clang regression tests (check-all) requires a version of bash that supports pipefail, i.e. bash 3.0+. On older system where /bin/sh is too old, one simply needs to hack LitConfig.py to point to /somewhere/else/bash that meets this

Hello - We are building Speex 1.2rc1 on Symbian/S60 using the GNU csl-arm-2005Q1C tool chain provided in the S60 SDK. We build with the supplied config.h and define FIXED_POINT to 1. We found that the encoded audio is "garbled" when we build with GCC -O1 or -O2 optimization level with fixed point enabled. But if fixed point is enabled and no GCC optimization level is specified,

----- Original Message ----- > Hi all, > My recent commit r187027 fixed a simple oversight of forgetting to > check for __ppc__ (only checking __powerpc__), which broke my > powerpc-apple-darwin8 stage1 tests, since the system gcc only > provided > __ppc__. I was wondering if this justifies using simpler macros like > > #define LLVM_PPC (defined(__ppc__) ||

hg@cally.queue.to wrote: > In mpc.lists.freebsd.stable, I wrote: > : : I'm also seeing this disturbing new problem concurrent an > : : install of 4.9-PRERELASE, have not suffered this problem > : : throughout 3.1 and up through 4.8-RC1. > > Coincidental is a lot more accurate. When the power supply on this > machine popped and hour ago and filled the room with