Hi Andrew, Thanks for the patch and thanks for your patience. The release is in 4-6 weeks but there are a lot of people on the team, someone will probably have a chance to look sooner.
Is there a deadline you are working against? Vince On Jun 1, 2015 1:16 AM, "Andrew Wilkins" <axw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, 1 Jun 2015 at 16:01 Sylvestre Ledru <sylves...@debian.org> wrote: > >> Le 01/06/2015 09:55, Andrew Wilkins a écrit : >> >> On Mon, 1 Jun 2015 at 11:06 Vince Harron < <vi...@nethacker.com> >> vi...@nethacker.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Andrew, >>> >>> We're not testing that configuration so I'm not surprised that you're >>> hitting problems. I'd like to look into it but we're working towards a >>> release now and this isn't the most critical issue. For today, I recommend >>> building without this flag. >>> >> >> No worries. When would be a good time to ping back? I was hoping to get >> the packaging updated for 3.7, but that may be too aggressive, and not >> leave enough time for bug fixing. >> >> Also, in case I wasn't clear: I have changes ready, I just thought it >> might be polite to bring it up here first, since I've not contributed >> before. Building without the flag isn't really an option for Debian >> packaging. The autotools-based build already links LLDB libs against >> libLLVM.so, and it would be best to preserve that. >> >> Yep, I confirm that it is needed to move the Debian & Ubuntu packages >> from autotools to cmake. >> For now, I have an important number of undefined symbols. >> Could you send your patch? I would be happy to test that. >> > > Sure, I've just uploaded it to Phabricator: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10157 > . > > Vince, please feel free to ignore that one for now, as you're busy. I > don't want to disrupt anyone's work. > > Cheers, > Andrew >
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
