Please do share logs. -viral On 26-Apr-2014 8:23 am, "Christopher Fusting" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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]> >> 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 ? >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> >>
