Hi, On 2018-03-22 11:36:47 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > On 2018-03-22 10:50:52 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: > >> Hmm. There is no LLVM 6 in backports. > > > > I think there now is: > > https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=llvm&searchon=names§ion=all&suite=stretch-backports > > > > Package llvm-6.0-dev > > > > stretch-backports (devel): Modular compiler and toolchain technologies, > > libraries and headers > > 1:6.0-1~bpo9+1: amd64 > > > > It's a recent addition: > > > > llvm-toolchain-6.0 (1:6.0-1~bpo9+1) stretch-backports; urgency=medium > > > > * Team upload > > * Rebuild for stretch-backports. > > > > -- Anton Gladky <gl...@debian.org> Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:58:43 +0100 > > Huh, it hasn't made it to my mirror yet.
Interesting. > Anyway, I upgraded and built with LLVM 6 and make check now passes on > my arm64 system. Woohoo! Yay, thanks for testing! > Via an off-list exchange I learned that Andres suspects a bug in LLVM > 3.9 on arm64 and will investigate/maybe file a bug report with LLVM. > Not sure if we'll want to try to actively identify and avoid known > buggy versions or not? I'm currently not inclined to invest a lot of effort into it, besides trying to get the bug fixed. A possible testcase would be to call createLocalIndirectStubsManagerBuilder() and report an error if it returns nullptr. But that'd fail once the bug is fixed, because we don't actually *need* that functionality, it's just that LLVM instantiates the stub manager unconditionally for some reason. Greetings, Andres Freund
