Any progress on this?  Trying to build Julia on a beaglebone black.  Would 
be happy to share the logs.

_Chris

On Friday, November 1, 2013 4:21:03 AM UTC-4, Viral Shah wrote:
>
> For 0.3, we are going to try migrating to MCJIT. LLVM is likely to have 
> multi-module support in the 3.4 release - which should make it possible for 
> us to use MCJIT, which should pave the way for ARM support. 
>
> Basically, we will get the 0.2 release done, the LLVM 3.4 release should 
> happen in a few weeks. If everything works out well and optimistically, we 
> could be experimenting with this quite soon. Keno probably has some early 
> work on MCJIT migration already. 
>
> Also, openblas is going to have an ARM port in the release after next - 
> which will be very nice, though not essential. 
>
> -viral 
>
>
>
> On 31-Oct-2013, at 10:18 pm, Arnaud Amzallag 
> <[email protected]<javascript:>> 
> wrote: 
>
> > Hello to all the Julia developers; 
> > 
> > first thumbs up for this great language. I love the syntax, not verbose 
> and flexible, and it makes sense. I wrote for years in Matlab and switched 
> to R a few years ago. I wrote C++ when I needed speed where I could not 
> vectorize my code. I was very attracted by the potential of having a fast 
> code and not vectorizing, and I picked up the language pretty fast. 
> > 
> > Apart from my job, I was a robotic hobbyist at some point, I am 
> considering playing with the Raspberry pi (Hoppy). It could make a lot of 
> sense to have julia embedded in a robot. Often, amateur robotics projects 
> rely on C compiled for Atmel processors (a few years ago at least it was 
> the case), and it is quite cumbersome to program in C when experimenting. 
> Julia seems great for experimenting with robots (for instance running on 
> Debian for Raspberry Pi) because it is a high level language, and at the 
> same time it seems very efficient. I saw discussions about having Julia 
> running on a linux for ARM; 
> > 
> > I wonder if there was some progress on getting Julia to work on an ARM 
> processor. 
> > 
> > Best regards, 
> > 
> > Arnaud 
> > 
> > On Thursday, May 16, 2013 11:21:24 PM UTC-4, Viral Shah wrote: 
> > See: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/3134 
> > 
> > -viral 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On 16-May-2013, at 10:20 PM, Stefan Karpinski <[email protected]> 
> wrote: 
> > 
> > > Perhaps we should make an "up for grabs" issue to track/encourage this 
> port? 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Viral Shah <[email protected]> wrote: 
> > > The first step would be to get a minimal julia running on ARM. I am 
> not sure if the debian armhf architecture is supported by LLVM's ARM 
> support. Here is the build log: 
> > > 
> > > 
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=julia&arch=armhf&ver=0.1.2%2Bdfsg-3&stamp=1368675598
>  
> > > 
> > > The julia system image build fails with: 
> > > LLVM ERROR: Not supported instr: BMOVPCRX_CALL %R3<kill>, <regmask>, 
> %LR<imp-def,dead>, %SP<imp-use>, %R0<imp-use,kill>, %R1<imp-use,kill>, 
> %R2<imp-use,kill>, %SP<imp-def>, %R0<imp-def>; dbg:no file:0 
> > > 
> > > If the debian ARM build can be made to work, it will at least become a 
> supported architecture and the rest will follow. 
> > > 
> > > -viral 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 16-May-2013, at 9:40 PM, Stefan Karpinski <[email protected]> 
> wrote: 
> > > 
> > > > Not necessarily. There are two possible versions. One where the 
> whole LLVM infrastructure is included in the runtime and the program can 
> and does JIT new code as needed while running. Then there's a version that 
> tries to pre-generate all code that might be needed and doesn't include any 
> LLVM infrastructure. That would either require being able to prove that all 
> possible code has been generated already, which is generally quite hard and 
> would require feedback from the compiler, or it would have the possibility 
> of failing execution. We will almost certainly have the version that 
> includes LLVM first and then eventually have a compiler option to generate 
> binaries that don't depend on LLVM at all. 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Lewis Girod <
> [email protected]> wrote: 
> > > > Thanks, that is useful information. 
> > > > Would the forthcoming static compiler remove the dependency on LLVM? 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Stefan Karpinski <
> [email protected]> wrote: 
> > > > h2j.c is an experiment I wrote using libclang to parse C header 
> files and generate Julia bindings for that code. It should probably be 
> retired since I'm pretty sure it is fully superseded by things like 
> Clang.jl and Cpp.jl. The Julia JIT does, however, use LLVM for code gen 
> (see src/codegen.cpp), so it would certainly be necessary to get LLVM 
> working on ARM, which is probably quite nontrivial. I have no idea if 
> bionic vs. libc is an issue, but it certainly could be. 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Lewis Girod <
> [email protected]> wrote: 
> > > > Thank you for the info.  Re getting it on android, I agree it is a 
> challenge, I think mainly the issue is getting all of the dependent 
> libraries cross compiled.  Does the julia JIT depend on parts of LLVM (I 
> noticed that h2j.c links in a bunch of LLVM libraries)?  There may also be 
> issues relating to the fact that android uses 'bionic' in place of libc. 
> > > > 
> > > > I will file the issue - having this in the make file would make is a 
> lot easier to understand what would need to be ported. 
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks again! 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Viral Shah <[email protected]> 
> wrote: 
> > > > Jeff is the best person to say how far we realistically are. Even 
> when we actually have this, getting it all working on Android will be 
> another major challenge. Perhaps we can hope that julia becomes popular 
> enough at Google and someone on the Android team hacks it all up. :-) 
> > > > 
> > > > Even if you can get the basic julia distribution working on Android, 
> it will be a good start. You can use the interface in jlapi.c and also look 
> at the way the REPL works. We do not yet have a "build the minimal julia" 
> makefile option. Could you file an issue? This is not difficult to do, but 
> will require some careful work. 
> > > > 
> > > > -viral 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On 16-May-2013, at 7:25 PM, Lewis Girod <[email protected]> wrote: 
> > > > 
> > > > > Re. the static julia compiler - it looks like that would simplify 
> these issues a lot, because that would avoid the need to x-compile llvm? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Do you know about how far off this might be ready - just order of 
> magnitude? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Lewis Girod <[email protected]> 
> wrote: 
> > > > > Thanks, Viral. 
> > > > > In googling around I have seen that people have been able to 
> x-compile the fortran matrix libraries for android, but it required a 
> little tweaking. 
> > > > > I'd like to play around with x-compiling the core of julia - what 
> parts are required to get the most basic functionality - the REPL I guess? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 9:30:41 PM UTC-4, Viral Shah wrote: 
> > > > > We have not yet had a successful ARM build. I can post the debian 
> buildd logs. I suspect that you will want the julia static compiler for 
> this, which Jeff is incrementally  working towards. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > -viral 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On May 16, 2013 1:47 AM, "Lewis Girod" <[email protected]> wrote: 
> > > > > I am also interested in experimenting with a stripped-down 
> installation. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I am writing signal processing algorithms to run on an android 
> phone and I'm trying to figure out if Julia would be a good solution, as 
> opposed to writing them in C (using JNI) or Java, both of which are pretty 
> cumbersome.  THe Julia language seems like what I am seeking in terms of 
> usability, but I wonder what it would take to get it running on an android. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > In particular, I would like to build a minimal Julia engine, 
> without graphics etc., that would run a single Julia program that receives 
> the next chunk of data in the stream and produces the next output. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I would need to figure out how to keep only the relevant parts of 
> the julia system and then cross-compile it for arm. 
> > > > > Do you have any recommendations on how to go about this?  In 
> particular, what components are needed for a minimal running system? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Tuesday, April 2, 2013 2:34:46 AM UTC-4, Viral Shah wrote: 
> > > > > Most of the bulk in julia comes from the libraries. Depending on 
> your computation, you may still need to bundle these. Julia itself is only 
> a few MB, including sys.ji. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > So, what you can do for now is embed julia by using libjulia, and 
> call it the way it is called from repl-basic.c. However, you do need to 
> bundle BLAS, LAPACK, and any other libraries your code ends up using. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Given that this is often asked, I will try to create a 
> self-contained example, and do a blog post once successful. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > -viral 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Saturday, March 30, 2013 2:16:13 AM UTC+5:30, Velky Pivo wrote: 
> > > > > The purpose is to distribute the application to the end user on a 
> flash stick, and call/execute the Scilab program residing on the stick from 
> Excel or Visual Basic on PC hard drive. 
> > > > > I do not want to open the Scilab IDE or command line to show, nor 
> I want to install full 150MB of Scilab, only the necessary support package 
> to run the scilab program file. 
> > > > > There are only calculations involved (numerical and signal 
> processing), no plots or visualization. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Thursday, March 28, 2013 2:08:12 PM UTC-5, Jameson wrote: 
> > > > > Yes, it is intended to be self-contained. If you set an 
> environment variable %HOME%, you can redirect all of the configuration data 
> also -- such as packages and git -- instead of using their default 
> directory %APPDATA%/julia. Note, typically, you will want to launch julia 
> through the included batch script, julia.bat. It sets up the %PATH% 
> variable for you, then passes all command line arguments through to julia 
> (so you can, e.g., pass the name of a julia script to run). 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Mar 28, 2013, at 2:43 PM, Jacob Quinn <[email protected]> 
> wrote: 
> > > > > 
> > > > >> I can confirm the windows self-containment. I currently run Julia 
> on 2 different machines with one set of julia files sitting in a dropbox 
> folder. 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> -Jacob 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> On Thursday, March 28, 2013 1:40:57 PM UTC-5, Alessandro Andrioni 
> wrote: 
> > > > >> I think the Windows package is already self-contained, you'd just 
> have 
> > > > >> to set up a different HOME directory for julia and git. 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> On 28 March 2013 15:26, Velky Pivo <[email protected]> wrote: 
> > > > >> > So, binaries are no go at present time. 
> > > > >> > 
> > > > >> > As other possibility, I would like my Julia program to be 
> placed on the 
> > > > >> > flash stick, along with the Julia runtime engine, libraries and 
> > > > >> > dependencies. 
> > > > >> > I would then call the Julia runtime, which would start my Julia 
> program from 
> > > > >> > a Windows application like, for example, Excel. 
> > > > >> > 
> > > > >> > Something like : ExcelStartProcess ( 
> FlashDirectory/JuliaRuntime.EXE 
> > > > >> > --FlashDirectory/myJuliaprogram --FlashDirectory/libraries 
> etc.) 
> > > > >> > 
> > > > >> > Is this possible, and could you please direct me toward what 
> files need to 
> > > > >> > be generated and placed on the stick for this to work ? 
> > > > >> > 
> > > > >> > Thanks ! 
> > > > >> > 
> > > > >> > 
> > > > >> > 
> > > > >> > On Wednesday, March 27, 2013 3:45:28 PM UTC-5, Velky Pivo 
> wrote: 
> > > > >> >> 
> > > > >> >> I am considering compilers for scientific computing. 
> > > > >> >> I need a compiler (most lokely for Windows OS) that will 
> produce a 
> > > > >> >> standalone executable for the intel 86 and amd 64 architecture 
> (no packages, 
> > > > >> >> runtime distributables etc.). 
> > > > >> >> C/C++ is out of a question, and anything interpreted is out 
> for me as 
> > > > >> >> well. 
> > > > >> >> At the moment I am only considering Fortran. 
> > > > >> >> 
> > > > >> >> Can Julia produce standalone EXEs ? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
>
>

Reply via email to