rodrigc closed this revision.
rodrigc added a comment.
Committed under rS277904
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D1722
To: rodrigc, brooks, imp
Cc: freebsd-toolchain
___
freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/m
dim added inline comments.
BRANCH
/head
INLINE COMMENTS
Makefile.inc1:416 I just looked for the LD="${LD}" assignments, and replaced
them all. Maybe, for consistency, we should add OBJCOPY=${XOBJCOPY} for the
powerpc case too, but I'm not sure if it's used at all in the powerpc build...
RE
rodrigc accepted this revision.
BRANCH
/head
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2187
To: dim, bapt, emaste, imp, rodrigc
Cc: emaste, imp, freebsd-toolchain
___
freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/li
Craig Rodrigues wrote this message on Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 19:28 -0700:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> > > It shouldn't be using the stdlib when it's built with -ffreestanding or
> > -nostdlib. Can you make sure?
> >
> > The AES stuff breaks the rules, and this is a co
imp accepted this revision.
BRANCH
/head
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2187
To: dim, rodrigc, bapt, emaste, imp
Cc: emaste, imp, freebsd-toolchain
___
freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listin
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> >
> > It shouldn't be using the stdlib when it's built with -ffreestanding or
> -nostdlib. Can you make sure?
>
> The AES stuff breaks the rules, and this is a consequence of it :( That
> stuff should be fixed.
>
>
John-Mark,
Do you have t
emaste added a comment.
>>! In D2187#11, @imp wrote:
> Where is OBJCOPY defined?
In share/mk/sys.mk, as long as `if !defined(%POSIX)`
BRANCH
/head
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2187
To: dim, rodrigc, bapt, imp, emaste
Cc: emaste, imp, freebsd-toolchain
__
emaste added a subscriber: emaste.
emaste accepted this revision.
emaste added a reviewer: emaste.
emaste added a comment.
Agreed it would be nice to have @imp sign off, but looks good to me.
BRANCH
/head
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2187
To: dim, rodrigc, bapt, imp, emaste
> On Mar 31, 2015, at 1:43 PM, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>
>> On 31 Mar 2015, at 22:06, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Dimitry Andric
>> wrote:
>>> On 31 Mar 2015, at 21:38, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>>>
Hi all,
We've recently integrated a version of profile_rt from the llvm
folks internally to replace gcov for code coverage. I was wondering if
there was a plan to replace the copy of gcov in FreeBSD with the same
(either in the base system, ports, or both).
Thanks!
_
imp added a comment.
Where is OBJCOPY defined?
BRANCH
/head
INLINE COMMENTS
Makefile.inc1:416 Do we need a similar change for powerpc?
Using Xfoo unconditionally is cool.
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2187
To: dim, rodrigc, bapt, imp
Cc: imp, freebsd-toolchain
___
imp added a comment.
>>! In D2187#7, @bapt wrote:
> yup you are right
>
> This looks ok for me I still would be more confident with @imp reviewing as
> well :)
Using Xfoo unconditionally is good.
BRANCH
/head
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2187
To: dim, rodrigc, bapt, imp
C
> On Mar 31, 2015, at 4:53 PM, Rui Paulo wrote:
>
> On Mar 31, 2015, at 14:04, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I put this in make.conf:
>>
>> NO_WERROR=yes
>> WERROR=
>> WITHOUT_BOOT=yes
>> WITHOUT_RESCUE=yes
>>
>> and used this script to build:
>> https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-
On Mar 31, 2015, at 14:04, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I put this in make.conf:
>
> NO_WERROR=yes
> WERROR=
> WITHOUT_BOOT=yes
> WITHOUT_RESCUE=yes
>
> and used this script to build:
> https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ci/blob/master/scripts/build/cross-build.sh
>
> I managed to build
bapt accepted this revision.
bapt added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
yup you are right
This looks ok for me I still would be more confident with @imp reviewing as
well :)
BRANCH
/head
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2187
To: dim, imp, rodrigc, b
dim added inline comments.
INLINE COMMENTS
Makefile.inc1:416 These are also unconditionally used in the previous block
for WMAKENV, e.g.:
```
WMAKEENV+= CC="${XCC} ${XCFLAGS}" CXX="${XCXX} ${XCFLAGS} ${XCXXFLAGS}" \
DEPFLAGS="${DEPFLAGS}" \
CPP="$
Hi,
I put this in make.conf:
NO_WERROR=yes
WERROR=
WITHOUT_BOOT=yes
WITHOUT_RESCUE=yes
and used this script to build:
https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ci/blob/master/scripts/build/cross-build.sh
I managed to build a lot of stuff, but then got build failures
in the aesni part of the kernel bui
bapt added inline comments.
INLINE COMMENTS
Makefile.inc1:416 You should probably test if XAS if defined: something like
AS=${XAS:U${AS}} and so on
Makefile.inc1:426 Same apply here
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2187
To: dim, imp, bapt, rodrigc
Cc: imp, freebsd-toolchain
__
dim created this revision.
dim added reviewers: imp, bapt, rodrigc.
dim added a subscriber: freebsd-toolchain.
Herald added a subscriber: imp.
REVISION SUMMARY
When I tried replicating Craig Rodrigues's efforts at building head
with the amd64-xtoolchain-gcc package, I noticed that during the b
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2015, at 22:06, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Dimitry Andric
> wrote:
> > On 31 Mar 2015, at 21:38, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Dimitry Andric
> wrote
On 31 Mar 2015, at 22:06, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2015, at 21:38, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> >
> >> On 31 Mar 2015, at 20:13, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> >> ...
> >
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2015, at 21:38, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Dimitry Andric
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 31 Mar 2015, at 20:13, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> >> ...
> >>> but then:
> >>>
> >>> + patch
> >>> Hmm... Looks
On 31 Mar 2015, at 21:38, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>
>> On 31 Mar 2015, at 20:13, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>> ...
>>> but then:
>>>
>>> + patch
>>> Hmm... Looks like a unified diff to me...
>>> The text leading up to this was:
>>> --
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2015, at 20:13, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> ...
> > but then:
> >
> > + patch
> > Hmm... Looks like a unified diff to me...
> > The text leading up to this was:
> > --
> > |Index: contrib/libc++/include/type
On 31 Mar 2015, at 20:13, Dimitry Andric wrote:
...
> but then:
>
> + patch
> Hmm... Looks like a unified diff to me...
> The text leading up to this was:
> --
> |Index: contrib/libc++/include/type_traits
> |
On 31 Mar 2015, at 19:17, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:12 AM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
...
> > Yes, this is a bug in libc++, when compiling it with newer versions of
> > gcc. I reported this upstream some time ago: https://llvm.org/PR22771
> >
> > Still haven't had enough
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:12 AM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>
> On 23 Mar 2015, at 01:49, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I tried to build HEAD with gcc 4.9.1 after the latest clang 3.6.0
import,
> > and am getting
> > new build failures related to C++ such as:
> >
> >
/builds/FreeBSD_HEAD
On 31 Mar 2015, at 02:53, Ed Maste wrote:
>
> I'd suggest checking /var/log/messages for further information. Is
> this i386 or amd64, how much memory does your build host have, and are
> you compiling with debug information or no? If had to guess, you're
> running out of memory (or running into
28 matches
Mail list logo
