Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> writes:
> This really depends on *their* release cycle, not ours. Hmm. Well,
> if we had a buildfarm animal that ran their latest release branch as
> recently discussed, not their main branch, then we could say "if that
> machine is failing, but seawasp is passing, now is the time to
> back-patch all the 'Track LLVM X' patches; if seawasp is failing, we
> should urgently look into why". I'm willing to set such an animal up,
> but Fabien or Andres may want to... A bit of shell scripting to peek
> at their branches or look for their RC1 tag or something like that
> depending on what we decide is the right trigger point.
Although seawasp isn't actually failing at the moment, it's emitting
a boatload of deprecation warnings, eg
In file included from llvmjit_deform.c:27:
../../../../src/include/jit/llvmjit_emit.h:112:23: warning:
'LLVMBuildStructGEP' is deprecated: Use LLVMBuildStructGEP2 instead to support
opaque pointers [-Wdeprecated-declarations]
LLVMValueRef v_ptr = LLVMBuildStructGEP(b, v, idx, "");
^
/home/fabien/clgtk/include/llvm-c/Core.h:3908:1: note: 'LLVMBuildStructGEP' has
been explicitly marked deprecated here
LLVM_ATTRIBUTE_C_DEPRECATED(
^
Is that on anyone's radar to clean up?
regards, tom lane
