On 01 Dec 2014, at 18:54, Dmitry Marakasov <amd...@amdmi3.ru> wrote:
> * Dimitry Andric (d...@freebsd.org) wrote:
>>>> We're working on updating llvm, clang and lldb to 3.5.0 in head.
>>>> This is quite a big update again, and any help with testing is
>>>> appreciated.
>>> Well, of 4 error logs from exp-run I've checked (one my port and 3
>>> unmaintained ports) two had basically the same problem and it seems
>>> to be libc++ related, so I ask: was new version of libc++ imported
>>> along with clang/llvm?
>> No, I really prefer to do this after the 3.5.0 import.  This is already
>> a very big import job, and I'd rather like to avoid importing too many
>> different components at once.
>>> Past experience show that libc++ should be
>>> updated along with clang, as it may have bugs new clang versions
>>> are not tolerable to.
>> In this case, there is a fairly simple fix:
>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?view=revision&revision=209785
>> I have pulled this into head in r275366, and also merged it to the
>> clang350-import project branch in r275367.  Please try again after that
>> revision.  It should be enough to just rebuild lib/libc++ and install
>> it.
> Sorry, I haven't tested the branch myself, only seen exp-run results.
> Would be nice to have another exp-run.

Yes, but we first need to fix another issue, which is more important:
several of the lang/gcc ports don't work properly, e.g. bootstrap stage
comparison fails.

There is also something fishy going on with gcc in base, which may or
may not be related: building the devel/binutils ports with it causes
cc1plus to segfault while compiling gold's archive.cc.

I am still searching for the root cause; any help in this area would be
greatly appreciated, as the maintainer has not responded yet.

> Btw, is it possible to merge the patch into stable/10 as well?
> It will make it possible to use clang35 there.

Yes, this is also why I prefer to cherry-pick; I have set an MFC timeout
of 3 days.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Reply via email to