Dear everyone,
It's not quite time to start the 3.8 release process, but it's time to
start planning.
Please let me know if you want to help with testing and building
release binaries for your favourite platform. (If you were a tester on
the previous release, you're cc'd on this email.)
I propos
Just a quick reminder: the branch point is coming up in one week, on 13 January.
Cheers,
Hans
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
And so the release process begins.
The 3.8 branch was created today from trunk at r257626, and the trunk
version was then bumped to 3.9.
Release blockers are tracked by http://llvm.org/PR26059. If you find
any bugs (either new or already in the tracker) that you think need to
be fixed before the
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for trying out the branch :-)
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 5:30 AM, Daniel Sanders
wrote:
> Hi Hans,
>
> I tried the release branch last night and I'm having problems building it.
> The problem is that test-suite is now building as part of the Phase[123]
> builds (because this pro
Dear testers,
Start your engines; 3.8.0-rc1 was just tagged from the 3.8 branch at
r258223. (It took a little longer than I'd planned, sorry about that.)
There are still a bunch of open merge requests and bug reports, but I
wanted to get the tag in so we can see what the build and test status
are
(cc'ing non-legacy llvm-dev this time; apologies if you get this
twice. Please don't reply-all to the first one.)
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> Dear testers,
>
> Start your engines; 3.8.0-rc1 was just tagged from the 3.8 branch at
> r258223. (It took a little longer than
That would certainly make my emails easier to address :-) On the other
hand, I do think there's a point to asking for testers each time and
then only addressing those that sign up explicitly. What do the rest
of you think about having a list?
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 1:31 AM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 2:15 AM, Ismail Donmez wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 1:47 AM, Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev
> wrote:
>> Dear testers,
>>
>> Start your engines; 3.8.0-rc1 was just tagged from the 3.8 branch at
>> r258223. (It took a little longer than I'd planned, sorry about that.)
>>
>> T
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 5:25 AM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> Unfortunately I'm having lots of trouble with rc1 at this point:
> * libcxxabi can't build, because it requires unwind.h, which we do not yet
> have on FreeBSD 10.x (Ed Maste is working on it for 11.x, but that is not
> ready for general c
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 7:54 AM, Ben Pope wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 20, 2016 07:47 AM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
>>
>> Dear testers,
>>
>> Start your engines; 3.8.0-rc1 was just tagged from the 3.8 branch at
>> r258223. (It took a little longer than I'd planned, sorry about that.)
> Some issues:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Renato Golin wrote:
> Hans, Daniel,
>
> How are things going? It's been 5 days and no word. I'm running the
> tests now, just in case, but would be good to know that no one would
> be committing to the release candidate 1 tree in the mean time.
Did you send this b
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> As to the symlinks, the test-release.sh script originally checks out the
> sources in parallel directories, e.g.:
>
> llvm.src
> cfe.src
> compiler-rt.src
>
> and so on. Within llvm.src, symlinks are made to point to each of these.
> Fo
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Ben Pope via cfe-dev
wrote:
> On Thursday, January 21, 2016 01:28 AM, Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 7:54 AM, Ben Pope wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, January 20, 2016 07:47 AM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
Dear testers,
>>
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 20 January 2016 at 09:31, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>> What about creating a release management mailing list ?
>> The testers are usually the same (hello folks!) :)
>
> I second that! It'd also be much easier on mail filters... :)
Tanya, can
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> Start your engines; 3.8.0-rc1 was just tagged from the 3.8 branch at
> r258223. (It took a little longer than I'd planned, sorry about that.)
>
> There are still a bunch of open merge requests and bug reports, but I
> wanted to get the tag in
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> It's not quite time to start the 3.8 release process, but it's time to
> start planning.
>
> Please let me know if you want to help with testing and building
> release binaries for your favourite platform. (If you were a tester on
> the previ
Hello everyone,
Source and binaries for LLVM-3.8.0-rc1 are now available at
http://llvm.org/pre-releases/3.8.0/
(Binaries for some platforms are still missing, but I figured it was
time to get this out there.)
Please try it, run tests, build your favourite projects, and *file
bugs* about anythin
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Brian Cain wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Brian Cain wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:31 PM, Eric Fiselier wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Brian Cain via cfe-dev
>>> wrote:
SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 11SP3 x86_6
This patch looks reasonable to me, but I don't know enough about LLDB
to actually review it.
+Renato or Pavel maybe?
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:32 AM, William Dillon via lldb-dev
wrote:
> Hi again, everyone
>
> I’d like to ping on this patch now that the 3.8 branch is fairly new, and
> merging
Dear testers,
Release Candidate 2 has just been tagged [1]. Please build, test, and
upload to the sftp.
I know there are still outstanding issues from RC1, but there have
been a lot of merges going into the branch and I think it's time for
another round of RC testing.
This RC comes a little behi
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> Release Candidate 2 has just been tagged [1]. Please build, test, and
> upload to the sftp.
Windows binaries are up: (sha1 sums)
23e18a4af76bed48ca8975a1b90b53b960508964 LLVM-3.8.0-rc2-win32.exe
87174857cdf76ac99b610672a3f721e4df300dda LLVM
Hello everyone,
Source, binaries and documentation for LLVM-3.8.0-rc2 is now available
at http://llvm.org/pre-releases/3.8.0/#rc2
Please try them out, run tests, build your favourite projects, and
*file bugs* about anything that doesn't work and needs to be fixed for
the release. Please CC me on
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 8 February 2016 at 22:56, wrote:
>> Imho it's critical to get parallel programming working on ARMv8 ( even if
>> it's crappy OMP) to start. Please enable it and I'll run the tests against
>> our internal QA and we can informally handle t
According to the schedule (e.g. on the right on llvm.org), we should
have tagged the release by now, but we haven't, so we're officially
behind schedule. I'm still optimistic that we can wrap this up pretty
soon, though.
This is what's blocking us:
- PR26509: Crash in InnerLoopVectorizer::vectori
Many thanks to everyone who helped out after this email yesterday!
Here's an update on the remaining issues. As you can see, it's a much
shorter list :-) I'm hoping to tag rc3 very soon.
Thanks again,
Hans
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> - Shrink-wrapping vs TLS: Davide
I had hoped to tag rc3 today (I feel like I've said this a lot
lately), but it's at least really, really close. I'm waiting for:
- r261297 - Implement the likely resolution of core issue 253.
Still in post-commit review.
- D17507 - The controlling expression for _Generic is unevaluated
New fo
Dear testers,
Release Candidate 3 has just been tagged [1]. Please build, test, and
upload to the sftp.
If there are no regressions from previous release candidates, this
will be the last release candidate before the final release.
Release notes can still go into the branch.
Thanks again for al
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:47 PM, Ismail Donmez wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 5:48 AM, Hans Wennborg via Openmp-dev
> wrote:
>> I had hoped to tag rc3 today (I feel like I've said this a lot
>> lately), but it's at least really, really close. I'm waiting for:
>>
>> - r261297 - Implement the li
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> Release Candidate 3 has just been tagged [1]. Please build, test, and
> upload to the sftp.
Windows (sha1):
76f8f91debd2e101b9adc4a6f2230fcd5e18bb5c LLVM-3.8.0-rc3-win32.exe
b87654327d3ae537f8afec06ea0fa63121b9a86e LLVM-3.8.0-rc3-win64.exe
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Ben Pope wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 05:51 AM, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers
> wrote:
>>
>> Dear testers,
>>
>> Release Candidate 3 has just been tagged [1]. Please build, test, and
>> upload to the sftp.
>
>
> On Ubuntu 15.10 x86_64 I got:
>
> Fai
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 2:20 AM, Daniel Sanders
wrote:
> clang+llvm-3.8.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-gnu-debian8.tar.xz (sha1sum:
> 2dedc6136d7cfbac8348652c543887964d92393c)
> Native: All ok
> Cross compiling to MIPS: All ok
>
> clang+llvm-3.8.0-rc3-mips-linux-gnu.tar.xz (sha1sum:
> f28614
Dear testers,
My list of blockers is empty, and there were no new problems
discovered with rc3, so I have gone ahead and tagged 3.8.0-final [1].
Please build the final binaries and upload to the sftp.
For others following along: yes, this means 3.8.0 is complete, but it
takes a couple of days to
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> Please build the final binaries and upload to the sftp.
Mac and Windows uploaded (sha1sum):
8d1f41aee5f3b29f14db90141430faee5e0d7723
clang+llvm-3.8.0-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.xz
f30de7ee8006dc779064202bcc345c418c1ac249 LLVM-3.8.0-win32.exe
32
It is my pleasure to announce that LLVM 3.8.0 is now available!
Get it here: http://www.llvm.org/releases/download.html#3.8.0
This release contains the work of the LLVM community over the past six
months: deprecated autoconf build, shrink-wrapping on by default,
overhauled MSVC-compatible excepti
+Tom who owns the 3.8.1 release
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Francis Ricci via lldb-dev
wrote:
> I didn't have any luck with r266423, these dwarf issues can get pretty
> tricky.
>
> Ok, that makes sense. We've been using these commits on top of our
> release_38 branch for several weeks now, a
Hello everyone,
It's time to start planning for the 3.9 release.
Please let me know if you'd like to help providing binaries and
testing for your favourite platform.
I propose the following schedule:
- 18 July: Create the release branch; build and test RC1 soon thereafter.
- 1 August: Tag, bui
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Robinson, Paul via cfe-dev
wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-boun...@lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of
>> Rafael Espíndola via llvm-dev
>> Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 7:47 AM
>> To: Tom Stellard
>> Cc: llvm-dev; Release-testers;
Breaking this out into a separate thread since it's kind of a separate
issue, and to make sure people see it.
If you have opinions on this, please chime in. I'd like to collect as
many arguments here as possible to make a good decision. The main
contestants are 4.0 and 3.10, and I've seen folks be
I've split the version discussion off into a new thread ("What version
comes after 3.9?") and CC'd everyone discussing it here so far.
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev
wrote:
>
>> On Jun 13, 2016, at 6:14 AM, Rafael Espíndola via llvm-dev
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The 4.1 relea
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> Breaking this out into a separate thread since it's kind of a separate
> issue, and to make sure people see it.
>
> If you have opinions on this, please chime in. I'd like to collect as
> many arguments here as possible to make a good decisio
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 5:55 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Dmitri Gribenko via cfe-dev
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev
>> wrote:
>> > Richard suggested that since we do time-based rather than
>> > feature-based release
On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev
wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:01 AM Xinliang David Li via cfe-dev
> wrote:
>>
>> I also believe this is the simplest versioning scheme*. It eliminates all
>> future debates on this topic (e.g, when to bump major version etc) and
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Jun 27, 2016, at 8:26 AM, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev
> wrote:
>> That's what concerns me about going to the scheme Richard and Rafael
>> suggested, of bumping the major version each time: we'd release 4.0,
>> and would Tom's dot-release
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 3:38 PM Hans Wennborg via lldb-dev
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
>> > On Jun 27, 2016, at 8:26 AM, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev
>> >
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 7:57 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Jun 27, 2016, at 4:57 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
>>> Eh, if we're switching to a completely unrelated versioning scheme, it
>>> doesn't seem completely unreasonable.
>>>
>>> We could also count how many time-based releases we have had and u
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Richard Smith via lldb-dev
wrote:
>> If 4 seems too confusing, and 40 seems too extreme, how about 10.
>> Seriously. It seems exactly as good as any other integer to start counting
>> rationally, and won't confuse people by looking like a 4.0 release.
>
>
> I think
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev
wrote:
> On Jun 28, 2016, at 12:55 PM, Chandler Carruth via Openmp-dev
> wrote:
>>
>> I think I agree with Chris with 3.10 being the worst possible outcome.
>
>
> I'd be interested to understand why you or Chris thing 3.10 is the worst
>
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith
wrote:
>
>> On 2016-Jun-28, at 16:22, Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev
>> wrote:
>>> On Jun 28, 2016, at 12:55 PM, Chandler Carruth via Openmp-dev
>>> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> 2) Following up on the May thread about the release process [1], I'd
> like to make the schedule we've followed for the last few years more
> official by posting somewhere on the web page that we're committed to
> shipping two major releases
Dear everyone,
The 3.9 branch was created earlier today from trunk at r275826, after
which the trunk version was bumped to 4.0.0.
Release blockers for 3.9 are tracked by http://llvm.org/PR28600 Please
mark any bugs (new or already tracked) that you think need to be fixed
before the release as blo
Dear testers,
3.9.0-rc1 was just tagged from the 3.9 branch at r277207.
This took a little longer than I'd hoped, but I think the branch is in
a decent state now.
There are still open merge requests and bugs, but I'd like to get the
real testing started to see where we're at.
Please build, test
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 29 July 2016 at 23:57, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers
> wrote:
>> There are still open merge requests and bugs, but I'd like to get the
>> real testing started to see where we're at.
>
> First wave of testing pass on ARM. Uploaded to t
Ouch :-(
Well, if we ever do a 3.8.2, that should be included. +Tom in case
he's maintaining a list.
On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Michael Kuperstein wrote:
> The crash dump looks like it's probably PR27071.
> The bug was introduced in r261387 (which was merged into 3.8) and fixed in
> r26446
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> Dear testers,
>
> 3.9.0-rc1 was just tagged from the 3.9 branch at r277207.
>
> This took a little longer than I'd hoped, but I think the branch is in
> a decent state now.
>
> There are still open merge requests and bugs, but I'd like to get
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 3:36 AM, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 1 August 2016 at 17:37, Hans Wennborg wrote:
>>> Is it time to do the back-ports planned? I only have a very minor bug fix.
>>
>> Sure!
>
> Backported the v6T2/DSP patch. Now just needs to get Diana's AArch64
> fix and we're fine.
Looks li
Dear everyone,
It's time for the release notes nagging email.
We have release notes for LLVM, Clang, clang-tools-extra, lld, and
Polly. (If there are more, please let me know.)
Most of these are pretty empty files; see e.g. the LLVM one at [1].
The internet does read these notes when we release,
Source and binaries for LLVM-3.9.0-rc1 are now available at
http://llvm.org/pre-releases/3.9.0/#rc1
Please try it out, run tests, build your favourite projects, and *file
bugs* about anything that doesn't work and needs to be fixed for the
release. Please CC me on any findings.
Thanks,
Hans
_
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 5:27 AM, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 4 August 2016 at 19:17, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers
> wrote:
>> Source and binaries for LLVM-3.9.0-rc1 are now available at
>> http://llvm.org/pre-releases/3.9.0/#rc1
>
> Ouch! I forgot to upload the AArch64 image! Sorry, it's there n
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Pavel Labath wrote:
> On 10 August 2016 at 22:34, Dangling Pointer
> wrote:
>> Thanks Pavel! I see the changes made in master branch.
>>
>>
>> By any change can these be back-ported to release38 and 39 branches? Since
>> llvm38 is the one aports is offering.
>>
>
I've merged r277997, r277999 and r278001 to 3.9 in r278540.
Cheers,
Hans
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Pavel Labath wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I do run a basic set of tests (compile+run test suite) on linux from
> time to time, but unfortunately I don't have time to be more active in
> this. I have jus
Dear testers,
3.9.0-rc2 was just tagged from the 3.9 branch at r279183.
This is a release candidate in the very real sense that if nothing new
comes up, this is be what the final release looks like. There are
currently no open release blockers, and no patches in my merge-queue.
Please build, tes
On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Le 19/08/2016 à 03:51, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers a écrit :
>>
>> Dear testers,
>>
>> 3.9.0-rc2 was just tagged from the 3.9 branch at r279183.
>>
>> This is a release candidate in the very real sense that if nothing new
>> comes up,
We're getting close to the final release. I know the schedule on the
web page says 'final' should be tagged today, but I still think it
should be possible to get there this week.
Source and binaries for LLVM-3.9.0-rc2 are now available at
http://llvm.org/pre-releases/3.9.0/#rc2
Please try it out
I replied on the "has been tagged" thread; I couldn't find the binary
on the sftp. Maybe you uploaded the wrong version, or in some other
folder?
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Renato Golin wrote:
> Hi Hans,
>
> I did upload the aarch64 binary, didn't you find it? Maybe I uploaded the
> wrong o
Dear testers,
3.9.0-rc3 was just tagged from the branch at r279704.
This one is very similar to rc2. These are the only new commits:
r279224 - Minor change to OpenCL release notes
r279260 - [lld] Add a note that 3.9 is a major milestone for us
r279468, r279474 - Fix gather-root.ll SLP vectorizer
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 8:42 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> Please take this for a spin. If there are no hiccups, the plan is to
> promote this to 'final' on Friday and ship the release early next
> week.
Windows is ready:
12f424c28f22b1c60f531da2f4ba86e5cdd1ca9c LLVM-3.9.0-rc3-win32.exe
e840f6b729d
We're very very close to the final release. Source and binaries for
LLVM-3.9.0-rc3 are available at
http://llvm.org/pre-releases/3.9.0/#rc3
This release candidate is almost the same as rc2, with the following
additional commits:
r279224 - Minor change to OpenCL release notes
r279260 - [lld] Add a
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Dan Walmsley via cfe-dev
wrote:
>Are these new RC3 Windows binaries now with asserts disabled?
Yes.
Thanks,
Hans
> From: Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev
> Sent: 26 August 2016 22:30
> To: llvm-dev; cfe-dev; LLDB Dev; openmp-dev (openmp-...@lists.llvm.org)
> Cc: Re
Thanks! I've added the binaries to the page.
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Vasileios Kalintiris
wrote:
> I've uploaded the following binaries for x86_64 and MIPS/MIPSEL too:
>
> 502e2d015ed9aa6fd2fced1fc45ffb4d97c720cc
> clang+llvm-3.9.0-rc3-mipsel-linux-gnu.tar.xz
> bc2dd5c96a094a43dd8033fd
Dear testers,
The final version of 3.9.0 was just tagged (from the 3.9 branch at
r280312). There were no changes after rc3. This took a little longer
than expected, but on the up side that means it's had more time to be
tested.
Please build the final binaries and upload to the sftp.
For others f
It is my pleasure to announce that LLVM 3.9.0 is now available.
Get it here: http://llvm.org/releases/download.html#3.9.0
This release is the result of the LLVM community's work over the past
six months, including ThinLTO, new libstdc++ ABI compatibility,
support for all OpenCL 2.0 and all non-of
Thanks! I've added the binaries to the web site now.
Cheers,
Hans
On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 5:41 AM, Vasileios Kalintiris
wrote:
> I uploaded the binaries for MIPS, MIPSEL and the X86_64 debian8 build:
>
> 0e76e4cb45aaa0ee06076da43bbb27f6624abf14
> clang+llvm-3.9.0-mipsel-linux-gnu.tar.xz
> 5a784
The snapshots are built with the script in
utils/release/build_llvm_package.bat. It's currently passing
-DLLDB_RELOCATABLE_PYTHON=1 and -DPYTHON_HOME=.
I was planning on trying to build a new snapshot today and can add
-DLLDB_DEFAULT_PYTHON_HOME if you think that will help.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016
Dear everyone,
There's still plenty of time left, but I'd like to get the schedule
set before folks start disappearing for the holidays.
Note that this release will also switch us to the new versioning
scheme where the major version is incremented for each major release
(i.e., when the 4.0 branch
Is anyone working on this?
I'm happy to include LLDB in the installer, but I'm really not the
best person to be debugging it.
If more files need to be included in the install, that's configured in
the CMake files (what's installed by the 'install' build target is
also what ends up going into the
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 05 Dec 2016, at 19:26, Hans Wennborg via Openmp-dev
> wrote:
>>
>> There's still plenty of time left, but I'd like to get the schedule
>> set before folks start disappearing for the holidays.
>>
>> Note that this release will also switc
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 5 December 2016 at 18:56, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers
> wrote:
>> The idea is that Tom's stable releases will keep incrementing the
>> "patch" part of the version numbers, just as today, so they would be
>> 4.0.1, 4.0.2, etc.
>
> Hum
The only thing needed to build the installer should be having NSIS
installed and building the "package" target generated by CMake. The
other prerequisites are mostly for building the visual studio
clang-format plugin.
Having said that, you don't even have to build the installer to see
what goes in
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 5 December 2016 at 19:56, Hans Wennborg wrote:
>> I'd like to avoid 4.1 because of the potential for confusion about
>> whether it's a major release (as it would have been under the old
>> scheme) or a patch release.
>
> But if the version
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 5 December 2016 at 20:07, Hans Wennborg wrote:
>> I'm worried that users will, with some reason, think that the 4.1 and
>> 5.1 releases are the same kind as 2.1 and 3.1 :-/
>
> IMO, this is too small of a worry to encumber us for the rest
It's not atomic, but I specify a specific revision when creating the
branch, across all projects, so it has the same effect.
When creating tags on the branch I just create it on tip-of-tree since
the branch is low traffic.
Does that address your concerns?
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 3:31 AM, NAKAMURA
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> Dear everyone,
>
> There's still plenty of time left, but I'd like to get the schedule
> set before folks start disappearing for the holidays.
>
> Note that this release will also switch us to the new versioning
> scheme where the major versi
This is just a quick reminder that branching for the upcoming release
is scheduled for one week from now, 12 January 2017. Please try to
avoid disruptive changes right before the branch.
The full schedule was posted in a previous email [1] and also under
"Upcoming Releases" on http://llvm.org/
No
Vadim, it looks like your change was committed in r291291, and I've
built a new snapshot today which includes it. Can you give it a try
and see if everything works?
Cheers,
Hans
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Zachary Turner wrote:
> I will commit it, in the meantime can you request commit acce
I'll do another snapshot maybe next week or the week after. You can
also ping me if you want it sooner or later.
We're kicking off the release process for 4.0.0 on Thursday. I don't
fully understand the problem here, but if there's some way to work
around it and get lldb into good shape for the 4.
I've downgraded my swig to 3.0.8 and built a new snapshot (r291454).
Please let me know if that works.
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Zachary Turner wrote:
> It sounds like the solution to the problem is to downgrade SWIG on the build
> machine. If it's using version 3.0.9 or higher, just use
Great! Thanks for pushing this.
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 7:00 PM, Vadim Chugunov wrote:
> Yes, the new build works!
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:20 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
>>
>> I've downgraded my swig to 3.0.8 and built a new snapshot (r291454).
>> Please let me know if that works.
>>
>> On Tu
Dear everyone,
It has begun: the release branch was recently created from trunk at
r291814 and the trunk version was subsequently incremented to 5.0.0
(as per the new versioning scheme [1]).
Release blockers are tracked by http://llvm.org/PR31622 Please mark
any bugs, old or new, that you think n
It's there for me now:
$ git fetch origin
remote: Counting objects: 811, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (561/561), done.
remote: Total 562 (delta 462), reused 2 (delta 0)
Receiving objects: 100% (562/562), 927.00 KiB | 1.29 MiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (462/462), completed with 240
Oh wait, the branch on the git mirror doesn't look right!
Anton, can you take a look? The first commit on the branch for llvm is:
r291843 | hans | 2017-01-12 14:12:41 -0800 (Thu, 12 Jan 2017) | 1 line
Drop 'svn' suffix from
Dear testers,
4.0.0-rc1 was just tagged from the branch, with r292377.
There are still open merge requests and bugs, but I'd like to get the
testing started to see what issues come up.
Please build, test, and upload binaries to the sftp. Let me know how
it goes. I'll upload source, docs, and you
The script lives in the llvm repo: utils/release/test-release.sh.
You'll probably want to invoke it as test-release.sh -release 4.0.0
-rc
1 -triple x86_64-apple-darwin
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Mehdi Amini wrote:
> Hi Hans,
>
> I can test it on macOS. Is there a doc to describe what to te
If you're using the svn repository you can just check out the
RELEASE_400/rc1 tag of the cfe module.
If you're using the git mirror, the last cfe commit on the release_40
branch before the tag is 3a631d565d.
Thanks,
Hans
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Andrew Kelley wrote:
> I'd like to test
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Mehdi Amini wrote:
>
>> On Jan 18, 2017, at 7:45 AM, Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev
>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear testers,
>>
>> 4.0.0-rc1 was just tagged from the branch, with r292377.
>>
>> There are still open merge requests and bugs, but I'd like to get the
>> testing star
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:12 AM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 18 Jan 2017, at 16:45, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers
> wrote:
>> Dear testers,
>>
>> 4.0.0-rc1 was just tagged from the branch, with r292377.
>>
>> There are still open merge requests and bugs, but I'd like to get the
>> testing st
Hi David,
Please file a bug about the lld issue on http://llvm.org/bugs and mark
it blocking PR31622.
I've merged the clang-tools-extra commit you pointed to in r292834.
Thanks,
Hans
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 10:56 AM, David Abdurachmanov
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> While building a full stack LLVM/Clang/l
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Bernhard Rosenkränzer
wrote:
> Hi,
> updated OpenMandriva packaging. Looks good, so far passes testing on all 4
> supported arches (x86_32, x86_64, armv7hnl, aarch64) after fixing one build
> issue in clang-tools-extra:
>
> FAILED: lib64/libclangIncludeFixerPlugin.
Source, binaries and docs for LLVM-4.0.0-rc1 are now available at
http://www.llvm.org/pre-releases/4.0.0/#rc1
Please try it out, run tests, build your favourite projects and file
bugs about anything that doesn't work and needs to be fixed before the
release, marking them as blockers of http://llvm
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Simon Dardis wrote:
> Looks ok for native MIPS, I have two failures on debian8:
>
> Failing Tests (2):
> XRay-x86_64-linux :: TestCases/Linux/argv0-log-file-name.cc
> XRay-x86_64-linux :: TestCases/Linux/fixedsize-logging.cc
>
> I'll investigate these fail
Thanks! I've added the binaries to the pre-release web page.
Cheers,
Hans
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Simon Dardis wrote:
> Test failures filed under PR/31756, noting the cause. I've posted on PR/31622
> asking whether we should consider
> this a release blocker.
>
> Uploaded clang+llvm-4
1 - 100 of 363 matches
Mail list logo
