On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 04:24:17PM +0200, Jens Rehsack wrote: > > > Am 21.10.2015 um 16:11 schrieb Martin Jansa <[email protected]>: > > > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 01:09:44PM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:59:37PM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > >>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 08:48:51PM +0200, Jens Rehsack wrote: > >>>> > >>>> llvm introduced new JIT technology MCJIT with llvm 3.4 and fixes ARM in > >>>> 3.5 > >>>> (see > >>>> http://llvm.org/releases/3.5.2/docs/ReleaseNotes.html#changes-to-the-arm-backend). > >>>> > >>>> Ensure JIT is built with llvm > >>> > >>> I'm tempted to leave this one after jethro is branched, unless > >>> default LLVM_RELEASE is updated in oe-core/jethro mesa as well. > >>> > >>> Otherwise everybody will need to set LLVM_RELASE in their mesa bbappend > >>> or we'll need to bbappend it in meta-oe. > >> > >> Or better, update this to keep 3.3 as llvm is meant to allow multiple > >> versions being built and installed in parallel. > > > > Another reason to keep 3.3 around is build on older hosts, current 3.5 > > fails in Ubuntu-12.04 > > > > | checking whether GCC is new enough... no > > | configure: error: > > | The selected GCC C++ compiler is not new enough to build LLVM. Please > > upgrade > > | to GCC 4.7. You may pass --disable-compiler-version-checks to configure to > > | bypass these sanity checks. > > I'm fine with keeping both. Shall I resend the patch keeping 3.3, or can you > extract the relevant part?
Please send updated version. > >>> What others think? > >>> > >>> And was this tested with mesa or just with java? > >>> > >>> Regards, > > Unfortunately (my DISTRO's are without X11) with Java only. > > Cheers > -- > Jens Rehsack - [email protected] > -- Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
