Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - Ubuntu 15.10 (master) #4716

Fixed in 7035da2. -Chris > On May 2, 2016, at 9:39 PM, no-re...@swift.org wrote: > > [FAILURE] oss-swift-incremental-RA-linux-ubuntu-15_10 [#4716] > > Build URL: > https://ci.swift.org/job/oss-swift-incremental-RA-linux-ubuntu-15_10/4716/ >

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Still Failing: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - Ubuntu 15.10 - Long Test (master) #87

0e38795 should fix this (local testing confirms) on Mon May 02 2016, Jordan Rose wrote: > Dave, I think this really is you, even if it's something the compiler should > accept. (I didn't look too closely.) > > Jordan > > On May 2, 2016, at 12:47, no-re...@swift.org wrote: > > New issue

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Still Failing: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - Ubuntu 15.10 - Long Test (master) #87

on Mon May 02 2016, Jordan Rose wrote: > Dave, I think this really is you, even if it's something the compiler should > accept. (I didn't look too closely.) I don't know what to do about it, but I'm investigating. > Jordan > > On May 2, 2016, at 12:47, no-re...@swift.org wrote: > > New

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Still Failing: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - Ubuntu 15.10 - Long Test (master) #87

Dave, I think this really is you, even if it's something the compiler should accept. (I didn't look too closely.) Jordan > On May 2, 2016, at 12:47, no-re...@swift.org wrote: > > New issue found! > > [FAILURE] oss-swift-incremental-RA-linux-ubuntu-15_10-long-test [#87] > > Build URL: > h

Re: [swift-dev] Build failure for Linux: "No such module: SwiftGlibc"

> ../swift/utils/build-script -d \ > --install-prefix="/usr" \ > --install-symroot="${cc_files}/out/symroot" \ > -- \ > --cross-compile-tools-deployment-targets=linux-armv7 \ > --cross-compile-sysroot="${sysroot}" \ > --cross-compile-toolchain-bin="${toolchain}" > --stdlib-deployment-targets="mac

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - Ubuntu 15.10 (master) #4698

My fault; I'm fixing this, sorry. on Mon May 02 2016, no-reply-AT-swift.org wrote: > Report > > [FAILURE] oss-swift-incremental-RA-linux-ubuntu-15_10 [#4698] > > Build URL: > https://ci.swift.org/job/oss-swift-incremental-RA-linux-ubunt > u-15_10/4698/

[swift-dev] TWISt-shout Newsletter 2016-05-02

Here is your TWISt-shout newsletter for the week of 2016-04-25 to 2016-05-01 https://github.com/pepperdog/TWISt-shout/blob/master/2016/TWISt-shout-2016-05-02.md Enjoy! -Kenny ___ swift-dev mailing list swift-dev@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailm

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-users] Swift Package Manager and main.swift

My preference here is that SwiftPM treat "Main.swift" as an error (and suggest "main.swift"), for now. If we agree the compiler should support it as a synonym for main.swift, then we can remove that. - Daniel > On May 2, 2016, at 10:55 AM, Jordan Rose via swift-dev > wrote: > > If it were j

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-users] Swift Package Manager and main.swift

If it were just SwiftPM that would be fine, but I'd like someone to sign off on it being okay to (potentially) break existing Xcode projects as well. (This needs Xcode- and compiler-side changes as well, unfortunately. It's not just the package manager.) Jordan > On May 2, 2016, at 10:52, Max

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-users] Swift Package Manager and main.swift

SwiftPM is case-insensitive about its conventions in general, so I consider this a bug. It’s possible it’ll break existing projects, but well, existing projects are breaking constantly at this time due to language changes, so this is just another thing. > On May 2, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Natthan L

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-users] Swift Package Manager and main.swift

Maybe that's why we should introduce the addition of 'Main.swift' before the Swift Package Manager (and Swift 3.0) hits stable? I've never requested to drop 'main.swift'. I merely prefer the additional support for 'Main.swift'. Library/Frameworks should not have 'Main.swift' imho as it leads to

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-users] Swift Package Manager and main.swift

My concern is not about people who have both main.swift and Main.swift; it's people who have libraries/frameworks (no main.swift) where one of the source files happens to be named Main.swift. This isn't likely, but it is possible. We're certainly not going to drop "main.swift" in favor of "Main.

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-users] Swift Package Manager and main.swift

Hi, Isn't it odd to have both main.swift and Main.swift for a project? Considering Swift 3 provides source breaking changes, can this be still worth an side effort to pursue with the compiler team as advised by Kostiantyn in the bug report? If so, how'd I approach them regarding this? Isn't th

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-users] Swift Package Manager and main.swift

[+swift-dev, bcc swift-users] I’d be fine with supporting “Main.swift”. The one downside is that it could change behavior for existing projects relying on “Main.swift” being a library file, and that might mean it’s not worth making a change. Jordan > On May 1, 2016, at 23:34, Kostiantyn Koval

Re: [swift-dev] Build failure for Linux: "No such module: SwiftGlibc"

> On Apr 29, 2016, at 23:46, Karl Wagner via swift-dev > wrote: > >> >> On 22 Apr 2016, at 06:46, Timothy Wood > > wrote: >> >> >>> On Apr 19, 2016, at 1:57 AM, Karl Wagner via swift-dev >> > wrote: >>> >>> I’m trying to cross-compile S

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - Ubuntu 15.10 - Long Test (master) #70

I could not reproduce it locally. But I noticed that foundation tests (foundation-linux-x86_64/TestFoundation/TestFoundation) were not recompiled in my local build, although the compiler changed. After I did a clean build all foundation tests passed. Can we try a clean build on the bot? Erik >