On 09/02/2010 04:55, Rob Farmer wrote:
I tried applying the patch to r212087 to rule out recent changes to
dtrace, but it made no difference. I used patch -E -p0 patch.
Hi Rob,
I see that in your build error are a bunch of things to do with atomic.h
and I recalled a patch from pjd@ on
of things to do with atomic.h
and I recalled a patch from pjd@ on current@ that he sent in the same
thread. I attached the downloaded patch. Maybe you can write back and
site if it helped at all so people have a reference.
Yes, it worked. Since this is just a testing thing and pjd alredy knew
about
On 02/09/10 22:48, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:59:15PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
[...]
Ok, now that I know you read everything carefully, here is the patch:
http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/zfs_20100831.patch.bz2
Now it is even easier
On 03/09/10 16:50, Peter Molnar, BSD wrote:
On 02/09/10 22:48, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:59:15PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
[...]
Ok, now that I know you read everything carefully, here is the patch:
On 09/03/2010 11:50, Peter Molnar, BSD wrote:
Requires 32-bit libraries installed under /usr/lib32.
Do: cd /usr/src; make build32 install32; ldconfig -v -m -R /usr/lib32
Did you happen to see the above ?
--
jhell,v
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 04:50:44PM +0100, Peter Molnar, BSD wrote:
Hi,
I would like to try ZFS + VirtualBox but I have got problems:
1) Linux 2.6.32-24-generic #42-Ubuntu SMP Fri Aug 20 14:21:58 UTC 2010
x86_64 GNU/Linux
I tried import that file in my VirtualBox but I have got error:
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 07:02:41PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
Exporting appliances is a bit broken (if you have more than one disk, it
will point all disks at the last one from configuration), so I had to
edit .ovf file manually to fix this. Maybe I messed something up, but I
was able
On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 01:55:51AM -0700, Rob Farmer wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek p...@freebsd.org wrote:
Ok, now that I know you read everything carefully, here is the patch:
http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/zfs_20100831.patch.bz2
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek p...@freebsd.org wrote:
Ok, now that I know you read everything carefully, here is the patch:
http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/zfs_20100831.patch.bz2
buildworld on i386 (yes I know ZFS isn't ideal there):
===
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:59:15PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
[...]
Ok, now that I know you read everything carefully, here is the patch:
http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/zfs_20100831.patch.bz2
Now it is even easier to test new ZFS! :)
Here you can find VirtualBox
Pawel Jakub Dawidek p...@freebsd.org writes:
I'd like to give you ZFS v28 for testing. If you are neither brave nor
mad, you can stop here.
[...]
So test whatever you can and report back. Look for regressions, strange
behaviour, missing features, deadlocks, livelocks, preformance
degradation
On Tuesday 31 August 2010 16:59:15 Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
Hello.
I'd like to give you ZFS v28 for testing. If you are neither brave nor
mad, you can stop here.
The patchset is very experimental. It can eat your cookie and hurt your
teddy bear, so be warned. Don't try it for anything
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/31/2010 17:59, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
Hello.
I'd like to give you ZFS v28 for testing. If you are neither brave nor
mad, you can stop here.
The patchset is very experimental. It can eat your cookie and hurt your
teddy bear, so
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:59:15PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
Ok, now that I know you read everything carefully, here is the patch:
http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/zfs_20100831.patch.bz2
Important note. Please patch with the following command:
# patch -E -p0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 2010/09/01 07:28, Josh Paetzel wrote:
On Tuesday 31 August 2010 16:59:15 Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
Hello.
I'd like to give you ZFS v28 for testing. If you are neither brave nor
mad, you can stop here.
The patchset is very experimental
On 09/01/2010 10:28, Josh Paetzel wrote:
On Tuesday 31 August 2010 16:59:15 Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
Hello.
I'd like to give you ZFS v28 for testing. If you are neither brave nor
mad, you can stop here.
The patchset is very experimental. It can eat your cookie and hurt your
teddy bear
Hello.
I'd like to give you ZFS v28 for testing. If you are neither brave nor
mad, you can stop here.
The patchset is very experimental. It can eat your cookie and hurt your
teddy bear, so be warned. Don't try it for anything except testing.
This patchset is also a message we, as the FreeBSD
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek p...@freebsd.org wrote:
Hello.
I'd like to give you ZFS v28 for testing. If you are neither brave nor
mad, you can stop here.
Woohoo! Thanks for all your hard work on this!
Matt
___
freebsd
This is awesome. Thank you!
-J
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek p...@freebsd.org wrote:
Hello.
I'd like to give you ZFS v28 for testing. If you are neither brave nor
mad, you can stop here.
The patchset is very experimental. It can eat your cookie and hurt your
teddy
Pawel,
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
I'd like to give you ZFS v28 for testing. If you are neither brave nor
mad, you can stop here.
The patchset is very experimental. It can eat your cookie and hurt your
teddy bear, so be warned. Don't try it for anything except testing.
Thank you very much
Infiniband is currently being worked on, sponsored by Panasas, Isilon
and someone else. It's coming along pretty well.
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/ZFS-as-a-Linux-kernel-module-1069056.html
Too bad FreeBSD still lacks Infiniband support. Currently we use ZFS
on FreeBSD and
That's cool. Thank you for your work on it.
best regards,
hanzhu
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 5:59 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek p...@freebsd.org wrote:
Hello.
I'd like to give you ZFS v28 for testing. If you are neither brave nor
mad, you can stop here.
The patchset is very experimental. It can eat
regards,
hanzhu
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 5:59 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek p...@freebsd.org wrote:
Hello.
I'd like to give you ZFS v28 for testing. If you are neither brave nor
mad, you can stop here.
The patchset is very experimental. It can eat your cookie and hurt your
teddy bear, so be warned
On Wednesday 11 August 2010 12:17:28 Rafal Jaworowski wrote:
On 2010-08-07, at 21:43, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
During the last two weeks I've been working hard to get USB 3.0 support
added to the FreeBSD 8+ USB stack. There are a couple of issues left,
but right now the code is in a state
On 2010-08-07, at 21:43, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
During the last two weeks I've been working hard to get USB 3.0 support added
to the FreeBSD 8+ USB stack. There are a couple of issues left, but right now
the code is in a state were enumeration of USB devices is possible and there
are
Hi,
During the last two weeks I've been working hard to get USB 3.0 support added
to the FreeBSD 8+ USB stack. There are a couple of issues left, but right now
the code is in a state were enumeration of USB devices is possible and there
are no dirty hacks :-)
The XHCI chip, which is the PCI
Hi. Until here worked fine. I'm on an AMD64-Quadcore (Phenom x4).
I did 'make buildworld'. Should I use something like 'make -j 8' for testing?
The 'installworld' and kernel I will test thursday.
snip
--
Marcelo Rossi
This e-mail is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
I
NO_WERROR= /etc/src.conf ; echo WERROR= /etc/src.conf
3) cd src make buildworld
Hi. Until here worked fine. I'm on an AMD64-Quadcore (Phenom x4).
I did 'make buildworld'. Should I use something like 'make -j 8' for testing?
The 'installworld' and kernel I will test thursday.
Hi again. I did
On 15-07-2010 19:42, Roman Divacky wrote:
I updated clang/LLVM in clangbsd to a newer version which I believe
will fix thas. can you rene (and everyone else) please retest with
updated ClangBSD and report back?
The updated version builds and installs fine, I'm now running the
clangbsd kernel.
2010/7/14 Roman Divacky rdiva...@freebsd.org:
hi,
ClangBSD was updated to LLVM/clang revision r108243 which we plan to
merge into HEAD. We would like that revision to be tested as much as possible
and therefore we ask you to test ClangBSD to assure that the revision
we are updating to does
I updated clang/LLVM in clangbsd to a newer version which I believe
will fix thas. can you rene (and everyone else) please retest with
updated ClangBSD and report back?
thank you!
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 01:33:04PM +0200, Ren? Ladan wrote:
2010/7/14 Roman Divacky rdiva...@freebsd.org:
hi,
testing!
Roman Divacky on behalf of the ClangBSD team
pgpKnKYxby9vx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Mark Linimon wrote:
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 12:18:41PM +0200, Alban Hertroys wrote:
Compiler bugs in gcc are probably just as hard to find as compiler bugs
in clang
There are two types of compiler bug: a) bug that produces bad code; b)
bug that makes the compiler crash.
Let's remember that
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 08:13:55AM +, b. f. wrote:
How did you obtain gcc4-errors?
bzgrep -q See URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions. Part
of ports/Tools/portbuild/scripts/processonelog .
mcl
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing
on 04/06/2010 11:13 b. f. said the following:
Mark Linimon wrote:
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 12:18:41PM +0200, Alban Hertroys wrote:
Compiler bugs in gcc are probably just as hard to find as compiler bugs
in clang
There are two types of compiler bug: a) bug that produces bad code; b)
bug that
On 6/4/10, Andriy Gapon a...@icyb.net.ua wrote:
on 04/06/2010 11:13 b. f. said the following:
Mark Linimon wrote:
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 12:18:41PM +0200, Alban Hertroys wrote:
Compiler bugs in gcc are probably just as hard to find as compiler bugs
in clang
There are two types of compiler
On 4 June 2010 12:52, Andriy Gapon a...@icyb.net.ua wrote:
on 04/06/2010 11:13 b. f. said the following:
Mark Linimon wrote:
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 12:18:41PM +0200, Alban Hertroys wrote:
Compiler bugs in gcc are probably just as hard to find as compiler bugs
in clang
There are two types of
DragonFlyBSD and NetBSD use newer GCC?
This is the first time I hear about that.
No doubt about major Linux distributions, though.
AFAIK, NetBSD does it for quite a while since they have a different pov on
this.
http://www.thejemreport.com/content/view/317
That piece of journalism is
On 6/4/10, Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 08:13:55AM +, b. f. wrote:
How did you obtain gcc4-errors?
bzgrep -q See URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions. Part
of ports/Tools/portbuild/scripts/processonelog .
But are you actually building
On Thursday 03 June 2010 8:52:36 pm Mark Linimon wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 01:22:05PM +0100, Bruce Cran wrote:
From previous messages I don't think sparc64 is currently supported by
clang very well, if at all, so I think we'll still need gcc in the base
system for some time.
I'll
On 6/4/10, b. f. bf1...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 6/4/10, Andriy Gapon a...@icyb.net.ua wrote:
on 04/06/2010 11:13 b. f. said the following:
Mark Linimon wrote:
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 12:18:41PM +0200, Alban Hertroys wrote:
NetBSD allows one to set HAVE_BINUTILS=2.19 and use
100% agreement with Mark here.
On 06/03/10 17:19, Mark Linimon wrote:
I'm just catching up with this thread, so apologies if this has already
been pointed out elsewhere.
One of the things that has been discussed w/rt compilers for a while
(not just at the devsummit) was bending our minds
I'm just catching up with this thread, so apologies if this has already
been pointed out elsewhere.
One of the things that has been discussed w/rt compilers for a while
(not just at the devsummit) was bending our minds around separating the
concept of base system compiler from default ports
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 12:18:41PM +0200, Alban Hertroys wrote:
Compiler bugs in gcc are probably just as hard to find as compiler bugs
in clang
There are two types of compiler bug: a) bug that produces bad code; b)
bug that makes the compiler crash.
The latter number seems kind of low right
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 01:22:05PM +0100, Bruce Cran wrote:
From previous messages I don't think sparc64 is currently supported by
clang very well, if at all, so I think we'll still need gcc in the base
system for some time.
I'll put on my tier-2 package builder hat for a moment.
IMHO it
Den 31/05/2010 kl. 21.50 skrev Erik Cederstrand:
I do have a problem with buildworld on an unmodified ClangBSD src/ tree
within a ClangBSD VM. Clang barfs on the mmintrin.h headers when building
it's own Lexer because it picks up the gcc version of the headers instead of
the clang
Erik Cederstrand wrote:
Den 31/05/2010 kl. 21.50 skrev Erik Cederstrand:
I do have a problem with buildworld on an unmodified ClangBSD src/ tree within
a ClangBSD VM. Clang barfs on the mmintrin.h headers when building it's own
Lexer because it picks up the gcc version of the headers
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Gerd Truschinski g...@truschinski.de wrote:
Erik Cederstrand wrote:
Den 31/05/2010 kl. 21.50 skrev Erik Cederstrand:
I do have a problem with buildworld on an unmodified ClangBSD src/ tree
within a ClangBSD VM. Clang barfs on the mmintrin.h headers when
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Garrett Cooper yanef...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Gerd Truschinski g...@truschinski.de wrote:
Erik Cederstrand wrote:
Den 31/05/2010 kl. 21.50 skrev Erik Cederstrand:
I do have a problem with buildworld on an unmodified ClangBSD src/
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Garrett Cooper wrote:
I personally would much rather have the glue in place to switch between
compilers and have things default to the base version of gcc than just
magically switch the compiler over to clang.
But I like my bikesheds painted gray.
Calling that a
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 10:46:54AM +1000, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
On 06/01/10 09:25, James R. Van Artsdalen wrote:
[snip interesting history]
I do suggest modifying the FreeBSD build process so that uname -a shows
the compiler and its version for both the kernel and userland.
Reading
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 06:01:03PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 03:52:27PM -0700, Tim Kientzle wrote:
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Presumably the import of clang to the base does
not mean the immediate removal of gcc.
Of course not.
I'm not part of core and don't
On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 12:28:06 +0300, Lars Engels lars.eng...@0x20.net wrote:
It would be useful to exclude clang or gcc from the build manually.
You'd either have to fix a lot of ports or install gcc from ports
anyway. Excluding gcc isn't too useful at the moment, but I see how
that could be
On 31 May 2010, at 11:56, Kostik Belousov wrote:
My main concern is the usefulness of HEAD for routine bug-fixing process.
The proposed merge makes it relatively easy for users to start compiling
the system with CLang. Our HEAD userbase is one of the most valuable
project asset to ensure the
I'm a bit disappointed in the polemical nature of some of the comments
in this thread. I think we're all better off because of the existence
of the FSF and their affiliates, and of a body of useful software
under the (L)GPL, even if we prefer another license. No one has
forced us to use the work
tests in FreeBSD are pretty sporadic, and a real
regression testing system is an open project
(http://www.freebsd.org/projects/ideas/ideas.html#p-regression).
There's a collection of tests in src/tools/regression which can be run by
installing devel/p5-Test-Harness. It does seem like the tests
quite a different result on my standard 9-CURRENT system,
testing a UFS filesystem:
router# prove -r /usr/src/tools/regression/fstest/tests/chflags
/usr/src/tools/regression/fstest/tests/chflags/00.t .. ok
/usr/src/tools/regression/fstest/tests/chflags/01.t .. ok
/usr/src/tools/regression/fstest
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 12:18:41PM +0200, Alban Hertroys wrote:
Compiler bugs in gcc are probably just as hard to find as
compiler bugs in clang, but if you have multiple compilers
at your disposal you can determine that you're probably
looking at a compiler bug instead of a FreeBSD bug.
On 6/1/2010 3:38 AM, Kostik Belousov wrote:
This is unsufficient. What could work is if clang provided some common
symbol into all .o files generated by it, e.g. __clang_compiled. And
then kernel considered tainted with corresponding banner printed when
weak reference to that symbol is
Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com writes:
I do not object to a single point in your message. On the other hand, all
said could be labeled as distilled propaganda.
Perhaps, but...
[...] This immediately makes the bug reports against HEAD almost
useless, since level of demotivation when
Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org writes:
I really would like to see CLANG more integrated with FreeBSD only
when there are 0 or similar (well-known, already analyzed, listed
somewhere, etc.) bugs by the compiler [...]
Does this means you're planning to remove GCC, since it has tons of
known
On 01.06.2010 16:55, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org writes:
I really would like to see CLANG more integrated with FreeBSD only
when there are 0 or similar (well-known, already analyzed, listed
somewhere, etc.) bugs by the compiler [...]
Does this means you're
On 01.06.2010 20:57, Vanessa Kraus wrote:
It's exciting that there may soon be an option other than gcc for
FreeBSD. However I have a few questions. Is there going to be a system
in place that will allow port maintainers to say hey this port is now
built successfully with Clang or hey this
FWIW, I support the import.
I don't think GCC is as bad as other people think it is, but I also have
been gravely concerned of the the reduction of toolchains down close to
one in our business. That in and of itself warrants supporting any
viable alternative.
On May 30, 2010, at 7:58 AM, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 03:02:40PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote:
hi,
ClangBSD was updated to LLVM/clang revision 104832 which is what we
aim to import into HEAD in roughly a week. We would like the initial
It was promised that before the
/BuildingFreeBSDWithClang
please report back any problems/success to me and/or this mailing list.
thank you for your testing!
Roman Divacky on behalf of the ClangBSD team
I'm running on a full ClangBSD system (world and kernel), and I've
had no issues for the past couple of days. I've had
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:03:17AM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
On May 30, 2010, at 7:58 AM, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 03:02:40PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote:
hi,
ClangBSD was updated to LLVM/clang revision 104832 which is what we
aim to import into HEAD in roughly a
happen when we are
satisfied with the quality of new compiler, instead of discontent about
old one.
people have been testing stuff and identified bugs. those bugs were fixed.
there are sure some more but we need wider exposure to identify those
new bugs and also clasify them.
the amount
On May 31, 2010, at 3:56 AM, Kostik Belousov wrote:
My personal opinion is that pushing the import now at the present state
of clang makes a disservice to FreeBSD, and possible clang. Why not keep
the glue on the branch as it is ? Motivated testers willing to help
definitely can checkout
as it is ? Motivated testers willing to help
definitely can checkout from the branch. Import can happen when we are
satisfied with the quality of new compiler, instead of discontent about
old one.
people have been testing stuff and identified bugs. those bugs were fixed.
there are sure some more
2010/5/31 Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:03:17AM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
On May 30, 2010, at 7:58 AM, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 03:02:40PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote:
hi,
ClangBSD was updated to LLVM/clang revision 104832 which is
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:54:29PM +0200, Attilio Rao wrote:
2010/5/31 Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:03:17AM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
On May 30, 2010, at 7:58 AM, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 03:02:40PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote:
hi,
2010/5/31 Roman Divacky rdiva...@freebsd.org:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:54:29PM +0200, Attilio Rao wrote:
2010/5/31 Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:03:17AM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
On May 30, 2010, at 7:58 AM, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at
If I understand the build process correctly, it should be possible to
have both compilers in base for some (presumably short) period of
time... then just have which one you use be a configuration option,
which should give LLVM/clang some additional exposure, without the
obvious risks of a complete
there are no known clang bugs (at least known to me) related to FreeBSD
in other words - at this point you can compile FreeBSD with clang (both
in the version in clangbsd) and it works (for people who tested it)
on amd64 and i386
I don't mean about FreeBSD, but about CLANG itself.
It
people are already experimenting with clang installed from ports,
with gcc4.{3,4,5} from ports etc. by not importing clang we can
maybe delay this a little but it's coming anyway.
I am pretty much fine and happy with people experimenting with clang
or any other compilers from ports, custom
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Roman Divacky rdiva...@freebsd.org wrote:
people are already experimenting with clang installed from ports,
with gcc4.{3,4,5} from ports etc. by not importing clang we can
maybe delay this a little but it's coming anyway.
I am pretty much fine and happy with
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 06:55:17AM -0500, Astrodog wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Roman Divacky rdiva...@freebsd.org wrote:
people are already experimenting with clang installed from ports,
with gcc4.{3,4,5} from ports etc. by not importing clang we can
maybe delay this a little
On Mon, 31 May 2010 06:11:32 -0500
Astrodog astro...@gmail.com wrote:
If I understand the build process correctly, it should be possible to
have both compilers in base for some (presumably short) period of
time... then just have which one you use be a configuration option,
which should give
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote:
(...)
From what it was claimed, even without the import, users can install
whatever compiler from ports, set CC and start the build. Essentially,
the import blesses the clang and its current state as ready for wide use.
state as ready for wide use.
This import simply makes it possible to start testing clang in a more
widespread
fashion. It doesn't bless anything or make any kind of claim to the
suitability of
clang for production. I for one am excited about this import and think that
this
kind of bold step
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Scott Long wrote:
On May 31, 2010, at 3:56 AM, Kostik Belousov wrote:
My personal opinion is that pushing the import now at the present state of
clang makes a disservice to FreeBSD, and possible clang. Why not keep the
glue on the branch as it is ? Motivated testers
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 02:49:35AM -0500, Brandon Gooch wrote:
I'm running on a full ClangBSD system (world and kernel), and I've
had no issues for the past couple of days. I've had the machine
working nearly constantly -- building new and updating installed
ports, running several ezjails
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Robert Watson wrote:
I think Kostik's question here is legitimate: clang maturity changes over
time. The earlier we adopt it, the sooner we get the advantages of clang --
but we also end up being the people who fault in more of the hard-to-diagnose
compiler bugs. Since
On 2010-05-31 16:49, Steve Kargl wrote:
So, what exactly should we expect, if anything, to break? :)
Did you build and install new boot code? ISTR that clang
can't compile src/sys/boot/i386/boot0 to the required
512 bytes.
No, boot0 is written in assembly, and run through the regular
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 05:07:44PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
On 2010-05-31 16:49, Steve Kargl wrote:
So, what exactly should we expect, if anything, to break? :)
Did you build and install new boot code? ISTR that clang
can't compile src/sys/boot/i386/boot0 to the required
512
On 2010-05-31 17:18, Steve Kargl wrote:
Doesn't this imply that clang/llvm isn't quite ready for deployment.
Being able to boot a complete clang/llvm compiled FreeBSD system
would seem to be critical.
You can boot it just fine, only the boot2 part is compiled with gcc, for
now. Clang can
for this change
(and when it happens I'll start testing clangbsd).
--
Eitan Adler
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 31/05/2010 16:03:07, Daniel Eischen wrote:
Is clangBSD able to support all our architectures? Does it
cross build for powerpc, mips, etc? Has it made a ports run
and does it successfully build and run most of our ports on
Tier-1 archs, and
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Steve Kargl
s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 02:49:35AM -0500, Brandon Gooch wrote:
I'm running on a full ClangBSD system (world and kernel), and I've
had no issues for the past couple of days. I've had the machine
working
... stuff ...
there's a wiki page on this effort:
http://wiki.freebsd.org/BuildingFreeBSDWithClang
please report back any problems/success to me and/or this mailing list.
thank you for your testing!
Roman Divacky on behalf of the ClangBSD team
I'm running
On 2010-05-31 19:44, Alexandre Sunny Kovalenko wrote:
What is the good way to do installworld from CURRENT-snapshot to
ClangBSD? Half way through some shared object (run-time loader?) gets
overwritten and it is all signal 11 from there on.
Hi Alexandre,
A fix for this has already been applied
Den 29/05/2010 kl. 15.02 skrev Roman Divacky:
ClangBSD was updated to LLVM/clang revision 104832 which is what we aim to
import
into HEAD in roughly a week. We would like the initial import to be as
painless
as possible and therefore we ask you to test ClangBSD to assure that the
On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 20:10 +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
On 2010-05-31 19:44, Alexandre Sunny Kovalenko wrote:
What is the good way to do installworld from CURRENT-snapshot to
ClangBSD? Half way through some shared object (run-time loader?) gets
overwritten and it is all signal 11 from
On Mon, 31 May 2010 08:18:42 -0700
Steve Kargl s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 05:07:44PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
On 2010-05-31 16:49, Steve Kargl wrote:
So, what exactly should we expect, if anything, to break? :)
Did you build and install new
/BuildingFreeBSDWithClang
please report back any problems/success to me and/or this mailing list.
thank you for your testing!
Roman Divacky on behalf of the ClangBSD team
Good people,
I have VirtualBox image of the ClangBSD (kernel + world i386) with the
clang installed, and Niclas generously offered
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 4:34 AM, Roman Divacky rdiva...@freebsd.org wrote:
there are no known clang bugs (at least known to me) related to FreeBSD
in other words - at this point you can compile FreeBSD with clang (both
in the version in clangbsd) and it works (for people who tested it)
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Presumably the import of clang to the base does
not mean the immediate removal of gcc.
Of course not.
I'm not part of core and don't know what they
may have discussed, but I went through some hoops
to replace 'tar' and 'cpio' in the base system
and have some idea what
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 03:52:27PM -0700, Tim Kientzle wrote:
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Presumably the import of clang to the base does
not mean the immediate removal of gcc.
Of course not.
I'm not part of core and don't know what they
may have discussed, but I went through some hoops
to
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Garrett Cooper yanef...@gmail.com wrote:
I personally would much rather have the glue in place to switch
between compilers and have things default to the base version of gcc
than just magically switch the compiler over to clang.
From all the threads I've read
701 - 800 of 991 matches
Mail list logo
