Le mardi 14 juin 2011 à 13:43 -0400, Anders Kaseorg a écrit :
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2011, Michael Wild wrote:
> > Perhaps we could prod upstream to hurry and fix the situation and then
> > backport those changes to 2.9? IMHO the most "future-proof" solution...
>
> I started this thread on cfe-dev yest
Le mardi 14 juin 2011 à 13:43 -0400, Anders Kaseorg a écrit :
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2011, Michael Wild wrote:
> > Perhaps we could prod upstream to hurry and fix the situation and then
> > backport those changes to 2.9? IMHO the most "future-proof" solution...
>
> I started this thread on cfe-dev yest
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011, Michael Wild wrote:
> Perhaps we could prod upstream to hurry and fix the situation and then
> backport those changes to 2.9? IMHO the most "future-proof" solution...
I started this thread on cfe-dev yesterday. It’s gotten a few replies.
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/c
On 06/14/2011 05:33 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Le mardi 14 juin 2011 à 15:45 +0200, Michael Wild a écrit :
>> On 06/14/2011 12:57 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>>> Le mardi 14 juin 2011 à 08:20 +0200, Michael Wild a écrit :
On 06/13/2011 11:50 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
I agree that t
Le mardi 14 juin 2011 à 15:45 +0200, Michael Wild a écrit :
> On 06/14/2011 12:57 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> > Le mardi 14 juin 2011 à 08:20 +0200, Michael Wild a écrit :
> >> On 06/13/2011 11:50 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> >>
> >> I agree that the Linux code in ToolChains.cpp is horrible and
>
On 06/14/2011 12:57 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Le mardi 14 juin 2011 à 08:20 +0200, Michael Wild a écrit :
>> On 06/13/2011 11:50 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>>
>> I agree that the Linux code in ToolChains.cpp is horrible and
>> unmaintainable. On the Clang mailing list one of the devs also said t
Le mardi 14 juin 2011 à 08:20 +0200, Michael Wild a écrit :
> On 06/13/2011 11:50 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>
> I agree that the Linux code in ToolChains.cpp is horrible and
> unmaintainable. On the Clang mailing list one of the devs also said that
> he would prefer configuration files. Shelling
On 06/13/2011 11:50 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Le lundi 13 juin 2011 à 17:46 -0400, Anders Kaseorg a écrit :
>> On Mon, 13 Jun 2011, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>>> Well, it works for me on my system.
>>
>> Your GccTriple is probably nonempty, because Debian’s gcc-4.5 has not yet
>> transitioned to t
Le lundi 13 juin 2011 à 17:46 -0400, Anders Kaseorg a écrit :
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2011, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> > Well, it works for me on my system.
>
> Your GccTriple is probably nonempty, because Debian’s gcc-4.5 has not yet
> transitioned to the multiarch paths, while Ubuntu’s has.
>
> > Inter
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Well, it works for me on my system.
Your GccTriple is probably nonempty, because Debian’s gcc-4.5 has not yet
transitioned to the multiarch paths, while Ubuntu’s has.
> Interesting. Do you know why upstream is not using this ?
I’m really quite mysti
Le lundi 13 juin 2011 à 17:22 -0400, Anders Kaseorg a écrit :
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2011, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> > I wrote this crappy patch:
> > http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-llvm/clang/trunk/debian/patches/14-multiarchi386.diff?revision=64&view=markup
> > it fixes the problem on my system.
>
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> I wrote this crappy patch:
> http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-llvm/clang/trunk/debian/patches/14-multiarchi386.diff?revision=64&view=markup
> it fixes the problem on my system.
Alright, but that isn’t going to fix the original issue I reported;
Gc
Le lundi 13 juin 2011 à 16:47 -0400, Anders Kaseorg a écrit :
> found 629861 2.9-4
> thanks
>
> 13-multiarch-newpath.patch doesn’t quite work. First, GccTriple is the
> empty string, because it’s only set to anything else if the non-multiarch
> path exists.
>
> std::string GccTriple = "";
>
found 629861 2.9-4
thanks
13-multiarch-newpath.patch doesn’t quite work. First, GccTriple is the
empty string, because it’s only set to anything else if the non-multiarch
path exists.
std::string GccTriple = "";
if (Arch == llvm::Triple::arm || Arch == llvm::Triple::thumb) {
if (!llvm:
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find crt1.o: No such file or directory
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find crti.o: No such file or directory
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find crtbegin.o: No such file or directory
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lgcc
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lgcc_s
I fixed this bug this morning with the uplo
f/user/rujasu/clang_config_log.txt
Thanks,
Jacob
- Original Message ----
From: Sylvestre Ledru
To: Jacob Rudolph ; 629...@bugs.debian.org
Sent: Sun, June 12, 2011 6:19:34 PM
Subject: Re: Bug#629861: fixed in clang 2.9-4
Hello,
Le dimanche 12 juin 2011 à 15:13 -0700, Jacob Rudolph a écrit :
&
Hello,
Le dimanche 12 juin 2011 à 15:13 -0700, Jacob Rudolph a écrit :
> Unfortunately I'm still seeing problems with clang 2.9-4 (running Sid on
> AMD64). When trying to do automake with CXX=clang or CXX=clang++, I'm
> getting
> the following message:
>
> checking whether the C++ compiler wo
Unfortunately I'm still seeing problems with clang 2.9-4 (running Sid on
AMD64). When trying to do automake with CXX=clang or CXX=clang++, I'm getting
the following message:
checking whether the C++ compiler works... no
configure: error: in `/home/rujasu/svn_devel/allacrost/game':
configure: er
18 matches
Mail list logo
