Re: clang+libc++ using missing powl

2013-09-06 Thread Steve Kargl
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 07:54:46AM +0100, David Chisnall wrote: > > On 5 Sep 2013, at 22:09, Steve Kargl > wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 09:52:13AM +0100, David Chisnall wrote: > >> On 4 Sep 2013, at 23:38, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >> > >>> As a result we have a lot of fallouts of p

Re: clang+libc++ using missing powl

2013-09-06 Thread Steve Kargl
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 03:02:18PM -0400, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote: > On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Steve Kargl < > s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > PS: I have working erfl and erfcl for ld80 archs. I'm still > > testing and refining the code. It turns out that computing >

Re: clang+libc++ using missing powl

2013-09-06 Thread Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Steve Kargl < s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 07:54:46AM +0100, David Chisnall wrote: > > > > On 5 Sep 2013, at 22:09, Steve Kargl > wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 09:52:13AM +0100, David Chisnall wrote: > > >> On 4 Se

Re: clang+libc++ using missing powl

2013-09-06 Thread David Chisnall
On 6 Sep 2013, at 16:59, Steve Kargl wrote: > Well, your commit has pre-empted any discussion on whether > there would have been a better kludge. Oh well. I'm very happy for it to be replaced by something better (and would be ecstatic for it to go away completely and for all of the functions t

Re: clang+libc++ using missing powl

2013-09-05 Thread David Chisnall
On 5 Sep 2013, at 22:09, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 09:52:13AM +0100, David Chisnall wrote: >> On 4 Sep 2013, at 23:38, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> >>> As a result we have a lot of fallouts of ports complaining about: >>> undefined reference to `powl' >>> >>> It seems like

Re: clang+libc++ using missing powl

2013-09-05 Thread Steve Kargl
On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 09:52:13AM +0100, David Chisnall wrote: > On 4 Sep 2013, at 23:38, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > > As a result we have a lot of fallouts of ports complaining about: > > undefined reference to `powl' > > > > It seems like libc++ is relying on a function we don't have yet >

Re: clang+libc++ using missing powl

2013-09-05 Thread Baptiste Daroussin
On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 09:52:13AM +0100, David Chisnall wrote: > On 4 Sep 2013, at 23:38, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > > As a result we have a lot of fallouts of ports complaining about: > > undefined reference to `powl' > > > > It seems like libc++ is relying on a function we don't have yet i

Re: clang+libc++ using missing powl

2013-09-05 Thread David Chisnall
On 4 Sep 2013, at 23:38, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > As a result we have a lot of fallouts of ports complaining about: > undefined reference to `powl' > > It seems like libc++ is relying on a function we don't have yet in libm, am I > missing something? I've attached a diff that I'd like to com

Re: clang+libc++ using missing powl

2013-09-05 Thread David Chisnall
On 5 Sep 2013, at 08:14, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 09:05:45AM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote: >> On Sep 5, 2013, at 00:38, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >>> I'm running exp-run to build the whole ports tree with clang using libc++ by >>> default. >>> >>> As a result we have

Re: clang+libc++ using missing powl

2013-09-05 Thread Baptiste Daroussin
On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 09:05:45AM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On Sep 5, 2013, at 00:38, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > I'm running exp-run to build the whole ports tree with clang using libc++ by > > default. > > > > As a result we have a lot of fallouts of ports complaining about: > > undefin

Re: clang+libc++ using missing powl

2013-09-05 Thread Dimitry Andric
On Sep 5, 2013, at 00:38, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > I'm running exp-run to build the whole ports tree with clang using libc++ by > default. > > As a result we have a lot of fallouts of ports complaining about: > undefined reference to `powl' > > It seems like libc++ is relying on a function we