Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 14.0.0 Release Schedule

On Wed, 2022-01-19 at 21:23 -0800, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've posted the proposed 14.0.0 Release Schedule here: > https://llvm.discourse.group/t/llvm-14-0-0-release-schedule/5846 > Any reason this isn't in the 'release testers' category you told us to follow? --

Re: [lldb-dev] RFC: siginfo reading/writing support

On Wed, 2022-01-12 at 11:22 -0800, Jim Ingham wrote: > If we can’t always get our hands on the siginfo type, we will have to cons > that type up by hand.  But we would have had to do that if we were > implementing this feature in the expression parser anyway, and we already > hand-make types to

Re: [lldb-dev] RFC: siginfo reading/writing support

On Wed, 2022-01-12 at 11:22 -0800, Jim Ingham wrote: > > > On Jan 12, 2022, at 4:28 AM, Pavel Labath wrote: > > > > I kinda like the cleanliness (of the design, not the implementation) of a > > $siginfo variable, but you're right that implementing it would be tricky (I > > guess we'd have to

Re: [lldb-dev] RFC: siginfo reading/writing support

On Wed, 2022-01-12 at 13:28 +0100, Pavel Labath wrote: > > This wouldn't solve the problem of writing to the siginfo struct, but I > am not sure if this is a use case Michał is actually trying to solve > right now (?) If it is then, maybe this could be done through a separate > command, as we

Re: [lldb-dev] RFC: siginfo reading/writing support

On Tue, 2022-01-11 at 15:48 +, Ted Woodward wrote: > You should use Hg for this instead of Hc. Hc is used for step/continue, while > Hg is used for everything else. > Thanks for the explanation. -- Best regards, Michał Górny ___ lldb-dev

[lldb-dev] RFC: siginfo reading/writing support

Hello, TL;DR: I'd like to implement at least partial support for reading/writing siginfo via LLDB. I can't think of a better approach than copying the GDB's idea of "magical" $_siginfo variable that works through the expression evaluator. I'd like to know your opinion/ideas. POSIX defines a

Re: [lldb-dev] Adding support for FreeBSD kernel coredumps (and live memory lookup)

On Mon, 2021-12-06 at 14:28 +0100, Pavel Labath wrote: > The live kernel debugging sounds... scary. Can you explain how would > this actually work? Like, what would be the supported operations? I > presume you won't be able to actually "stop" the kernel, but what will > you actually be able to

Re: [lldb-dev] Adding support for FreeBSD kernel coredumps (and live memory lookup)

On Thu, 2021-12-02 at 09:40 +, David Spickett wrote: > Can you give an example workflow of how these core files are used by a > developer? For some background. Right now, the idea is that when the kernel crashes, the developer can take the vmcore file use LLDB to look the kernel state up.

[lldb-dev] Adding support for FreeBSD kernel coredumps (and live memory lookup)

Hi, I'm working on a FreeBSD-sponsored project aiming at improving LLDB's support for debugging FreeBSD kernel to achieve feature parity with KGDB. As a part of that, I'd like to improve LLDB's ability of working with kernel coredumps ("vmcores"), plus add the ability to read kernel memory via

Re: [lldb-dev] Serial port support in LLDB

"ConnectionFileDescriptor" is really the best place for this. > > On 05/10/2021 11:21, Michał Górny via lldb-dev wrote: > > Hi, everyone. > > > > I'm working on improving LLDB's feature parity with GDB. As part of > > this, I'm working on bettering LLDB's seri

[lldb-dev] Serial port support in LLDB

Hi, everyone. I'm working on improving LLDB's feature parity with GDB. As part of this, I'm working on bettering LLDB's serial port support. Since serial ports are not that common these days, I've been asked to explain a bit what I'd like to do. At this point, LLDB (client) has minimal

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 13.0.0-rc4 has been tagged

On Fri, 2021-09-24 at 22:53 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've tagged 13.0.0-rc4. Please test and upload binaries. If all goes well, > we > will release 13.0.0-final in ~1 week. No regressions here. I've seen some random compiler-rt test fluke once but not on the

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 13.0.0-rc3 has been tagged

On Mon, 2021-09-13 at 21:40 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've tagged 13.0.0-rc3. This will likely be the last rc unless there are > critical bugs that are found. Please test the release and report results. > There's one regression in compiler-rt compared to rc2:

Re: [lldb-dev] Duplicate use of "sp" register name on x86 targets

On Mon, 2021-09-06 at 13:23 +0200, Pavel Labath wrote: > On 25/08/2021 21:13, Michał Górny via lldb-dev wrote: > > Hi, > > > > While working on improving gdbserver compatibility, I've noticed that > > "sp" is used twice: > > > > 1. as an alt_name

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 13.0.0-rc2 has been tagged

On Thu, 2021-08-26 at 22:20 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've tagged the 13.0.0-rc2 release. Testers can begin testing and uploading > binaries. > No new bugs on my end since -rc1. To be more precise: - orclazy non-amd64 test skip still needs backporting:

[lldb-dev] Duplicate use of "sp" register name on x86 targets

Hi, While working on improving gdbserver compatibility, I've noticed that "sp" is used twice: 1. as an alt_name for esp/rsp register (giving full 32/64-bit stack pointer), 2. and as the name of sp pseudo-register (giving ESP/RSP truncated to 16 bits). FWICS the current lookup logic (at least

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 13.0.0-rc1 pushed out to Monday

On Thu, 2021-07-29 at 23:00 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > I'm going to give the release/13.x branch a few more days to > stabilize, so I plan on tagging 13.0.0-rc1 on Monday now > instead of Friday. > I must've missed the announcement of the branch split. I suppose this is my

Re: [lldb-dev] [RFC] Improving protocol-level compatibility between LLDB and GDB

On Mon, 2021-04-19 at 09:59 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > I'm considering running some effort to improve protocol-level > compatibility between LLDB and GDB. I'd like to hear if there's > interest in such patches being accepted into LLDB. > > My goal would be to make it possible to use LLDB to

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 12.0.1-rc4 release has been tagged

On Fri, 2021-07-02 at 13:59 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've tagged the 12.0.1-rc4 release. This will hopefully be the last release > candidate. Please test and upload binaries. > This mostly looks good on amd64 & x86, except that: 1. Three compiler-rt tests fail

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 12.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged

On Tue, 2021-06-01 at 10:03 -0700, Tom Stellard wrote: > On 5/28/21 1:45 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 00:15 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I've tagged the 12.0.1-rc1 release. Testers may upload binaries and > > > report results. > >

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 12.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged

On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 00:15 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've tagged the 12.0.1-rc1 release. Testers may upload binaries and report > results. > I've started testing, hit two bugs I've already reported for 12.0.0 RCs and figured out I'm wasting my time. It seems

Re: [lldb-dev] [RFC] Improving protocol-level compatibility between LLDB and GDB

On Mon, 2021-04-19 at 16:29 -0700, Greg Clayton wrote: > > I think the first blocker towards this project are existing > > implementation bugs in LLDB. For example, the vFile implementation is > > documented as using incorrect data encoding and open flags. This is not > > something that can be

[lldb-dev] [RFC] Improving protocol-level compatibility between LLDB and GDB

Hi, everyone. I'm considering running some effort to improve protocol-level compatibility between LLDB and GDB. I'd like to hear if there's interest in such patches being accepted into LLDB. My goal would be to make it possible to use LLDB to connect to gdbserver (and other servers implementing

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 11.1.0-rc3 has been tagged

On Mon, 2021-02-08 at 09:14 -0800, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've tagged LLVM 11.1.0-rc3. If there are no issues, then I'll be tagging > the final release in 1 week. Testers please test and upload binaries. Do I understand correctly that there are no changes here for

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] RFC: Automated signing of release files

On Tue, 2021-01-12 at 21:13 -0800, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to automate the signing of some of the release files we > upload to the release page, starting with the source tarballs. My > initial goal is to have a CI job that automatically creates, signs,

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-final has been tagged

On Tue, 2021-01-05 at 19:21 -0800, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-final. Testers can upload the final binaries now. Gentoo's shipping them since the day before yesterday, and nothing new to report compared to the last RC. -- Best regards, Michał

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc2 has been tagged

On Mon, 2021-01-04 at 19:19 -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > On 12/21/20 11:51 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-12-18 at 22:33 -0800, Tom Stellard via Release-testers > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I've just tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc2, hopefully this will be the last > > > release candidate. 

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc2 has been tagged

On Fri, 2020-12-18 at 22:33 -0800, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've just tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc2, hopefully this will be the last > release candidate.  Testers can begin testing and uploading binaries. Gentoo amd64 looks good-ish, except that: 1) compiler-rt LSAN seems

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [11.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 3 is here

On Tue, 2020-09-22 at 17:12 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hello everyone, > > After some delay, the llvmorg-11.0.0-rc3 tag was just created. > > Source code and docs are available at > https://prereleases.llvm.org/11.0.0/#rc3 > and >

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [11.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 2 is here

On Thu, 2020-08-20 at 22:34 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hello everyone, > > The llvmorg-11.0.0-rc2 tag was just created. > > Source code and docs are available at > https://prereleases.llvm.org/11.0.0/#rc2 and >

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [11.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 1 is here

On Tue, 2020-07-28 at 19:49 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hello everyone, > > We're a little bit behind schedule, but RC1 is now here. It was tagged > earlier today as llvmorg-11.0.0-rc1. > > Source code and docs are available at > https://prereleases.llvm.org/11.0.0/#rc1 and

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 10.0.1-rc4 tagged

On Tue, 2020-07-07 at 21:08 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've tagged 10.0.1-rc4, please test and report the results. > This one looks good on Gentoo. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 10.0.1-rc3 has been tagged

On Mon, 2020-07-06 at 19:48 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've tagged LLVM 10.0.1-rc3. This will hopefully be the last release > candidate, please test it out and report results on this thread. > Tests still fail on x86, as the following backport is still missing:

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 10.0.1-rc2 release has been tagged

On Fri, 2020-06-26 at 17:44 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've tagged the 10.0.1-rc2 release, please test the release and report any > issues. > So far one regression in LLVM tests, apparently caused by incomplete asm fix backport. FWICS additional backport was

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 10.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged

On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 18:22 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I have just tagged the 10.0.1-rc1 release. Testers can begin testing and > uploading > binaries. > > If you still want to get a fix into the 10.0.1 release, you still have about > a month > to get your fix

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 10.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged

On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 18:22 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I have just tagged the 10.0.1-rc1 release. Testers can begin testing and > uploading > binaries. > > If you still want to get a fix into the 10.0.1 release, you still have about > a month > to get your fix

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] RFC: Release process changes

On Thu, 2020-05-21 at 11:59 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The > current process is documented here: > https://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html > > There are two parts to this proposal. The first

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [10.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 6 is here

On Mon, 2020-03-23 at 20:28 +0100, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Dear everyone, > > I had hoped rc5 would be the last one, but we needed to pick up yet another > fix. > > Release candidate 6 was tagged as llvmorg-10.0.0-rc6 on the > release/10.x branch at d32170dbd5b. It picks up

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [10.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 5 is here

On Thu, 2020-03-19 at 14:51 +0100, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hello again, > > I had hoped that rc4 would be the last one, but I wanted to pick up > one more fix, so here we go. > I realize it's late but I've just gotten a major bug report. Long story short, if you happen to

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [10.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 4 is here

On Fri, 2020-03-13 at 20:09 +0100, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hello everyone, > > Release Candidate 4 was tagged earlier today as llvmorg-10.0.0-rc4 on > the release branch at b406eab8880. It contains 12 commits since the > previous release candidate. > > If no new problems

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [10.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 3 is here

On Wed, 2020-03-04 at 14:49 +0100, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hello everyone, > > It took a bit longer than planned, but Release Candidate 3 is now > here. It was tagged as llvmorg-10.0.0-rc3 on the release branch at > 3a843031a5 and contains 95 commits since the previous release

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [10.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 2 is here

On Thu, 2020-02-13 at 23:34 +0100, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hello everyone, > > Release Candidate 2 was tagged earlier today as llvmorg-10.0.0-rc2. It > includes 98 commits since the previous release candidate. > This time I've switched to python3.8, and I've noticed that

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [10.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 1 is here

On Thu, 2020-01-30 at 14:38 -0500, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Please file bug reports for any issues you find as blockers of > https://llvm.org/pr44555 > > Release testers: please start your engines, run the script, share your > results, and upload binaries. > Gentoo/amd64

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 9.0.1-rc2 has been tagged

On Fri, 2019-12-06 at 19:03 -0800, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've tagged LLVM 9.0.1-rc2. Testers can begin testing and uploading binaries. > If all goes well, this will be the last -rc. > My initial amd64 multilib Gentoo testing reveals no issues left, except for LLDB

Re: [lldb-dev] [Openmp-dev] GitHub Migration Starting Now

On Tue, 2019-10-22 at 09:57 -0700, Tom Stellard via lldb-dev wrote: > On 10/22/2019 09:08 AM, Tom Stellard via Openmp-dev wrote: > > Hi, > > > > We're getting ready to start migrating to GitHub. SVN will be moved to > > read-only now and we'll > > begin the process of turning on GitHub commit

Re: [lldb-dev] Offline build bots

On Sat, 2019-10-12 at 11:39 -0700, Davide Italiano wrote: > Presumably Pavel and Michal (both cc'ed). > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 3:06 PM António Afonso via lldb-dev > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > All the *nix build bots (lldb-x86_86-{debian,fedora}, netbsd-amd64) have > > been offline for a

Re: [lldb-dev] LLDB finish_swig and Python module installation broken for multi-configuration generators

On Thu, 2019-10-10 at 23:11 +, Ted Woodward wrote: > Starting in r372835 (Fix installing Python modules on systems using > /usr/lib), the finish_swig and installation steps using multi-configuration > generators (like Visual Studio or XCode) are broken. > > The problem is the symlink and

Re: [lldb-dev] LLDB finish_swig and Python module installation broken for multi-configuration generators

Dnia October 10, 2019 11:11:20 PM UTC, Ted Woodward napisał(a): >Starting in r372835 (Fix installing Python modules on systems using >/usr/lib), the finish_swig and installation steps using >multi-configuration generators (like Visual Studio or XCode) are >broken. > >The problem is the symlink

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 6 is here

On Thu, 2019-09-19 at 16:51 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 4:05 PM Hans Wennborg wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > > 9.0.0-rc6 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r372100. In > > the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc6. > > This has

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 6 is here

On Thu, 2019-09-19 at 16:51 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 4:05 PM Hans Wennborg wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > > 9.0.0-rc6 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r372100. In > > the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc6. > > This has

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 6 is here

On Tue, 2019-09-17 at 16:05 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hello everyone, > > 9.0.0-rc6 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r372100. In > the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc6. > > Source code and docs are available at

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 4 is here

On Tue, 2019-09-10 at 12:26 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hello again, > > 9.0.0-rc4 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r371490. In > the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc4. > So I've done a bit more testing this time, that included: Gentoo/amd64,

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 3 is here

On Sun, 2019-09-01 at 16:21 +0200, Michał Górny via Release-testers wrote: > On Fri, 2019-08-30 at 18:38 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers > wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > > 9.0.0-rc3 was tagged today from the release_90 branch at r370450. In > > the Git monorepo, it's tagged as

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 3 is here

On Fri, 2019-08-30 at 18:38 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hello everyone, > > 9.0.0-rc3 was tagged today from the release_90 branch at r370450. In > the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc3. > > Source code and docs are available at

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [9.0.0 Release] An update on the schedule: the release is late

On Wed, 2019-08-28 at 16:38 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hello everyone, > > It's the 28th of August, which according to the schedule should be > when llvm 9 gets released. However, it's not ready yet, which means > it's now officially late. > > There are still one or two

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [9.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 1 is here

On Mon, 2019-07-29 at 16:32 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hi everyone, > > 9.0.0-rc1 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r367217 > (tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc1 in the Git monorepo). > > Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc1 >

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [9.0.0 Release] The release branch is open; trunk is now 10.0.0

On Thu, 2019-07-18 at 14:19 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Hello everyone, > > The release branch for LLVM 9 and its sub-projects was just created > from trunk at r366426, and the trunk version was subsequently bumped > to 10.0.0. > > Release blockers are tracked by

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] 8.0.1-final has been tagged

On Fri, 2019-07-19 at 20:21 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > The 8.0.1 final release has been tagged. Testers please upload the final > binaries. > Unleashed on Gentoo users. Test results as before. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: This is

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [cfe-dev] LLVM 8.0.1-rc3

On Sat, 2019-07-06 at 14:36 +1200, Christian Gagneraud via Release- testers wrote: > On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 22:16, Yvan Roux via cfe-dev > wrote: > > > Expected Passes: 53266 (rc2: 53259) > > > Expected Failures : 213 (rc2: 213) > > > Unsupported Tests : 1718 (rc2: 1719) > > >

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 8.0.1-rc3

On Thu, 2019-06-27 at 15:56 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've just tagged LLVM 8.0.1-rc3. Testers, please begin testing and report > results. > Looks as good as it's gonna get on Gentoo. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: This is a

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 8.0.1-rc2 has been tagged

On Mon, 2019-06-10 at 20:53 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've tagged the 8.0.1-rc2 release, testers please begin testing and upload > your > binaries. > > There are still a few more bug fixes that I need to merge, so > I'm planning to do one more release candidate

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] Release 7.1.0 -rc1 has been tagged

On Wed, 2019-03-27 at 14:27 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > I've just tagged 7.1.0-rc1. Testers, please begin testing and reporting > results. > I've built all projects, and tested LLVM+Clang, and everything looks good on Gentoo. -- Best regards, Michał Górny

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [8.0.0 Release] rc5 has been tagged

On Tue, 2019-03-12 at 12:16 +0100, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Dear testers, > > 8.0.0-rc5 was just tagged from the release_80 branch at r355909. > > This is identical to rc4 with the addition of r355743. Hopefully it is the > final release candidate, so please give it a good

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [8.0.0 Release] rc4 has been tagged

On Fri, 2019-03-08 at 13:24 +0100, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Dear testers, > > 8.0.0-rc4 was just tagged from the release_80 branch at r355690. > > This is similar to rc3, but it contains a few important fixes, notably > for https://llvm.org/PR40890 > > I'm hoping that this is

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 7.1.0 release - Please test the branch

On Fri, 2019-02-08 at 13:01 -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > On 02/06/2019 10:57 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Wed, 2019-02-06 at 14:09 -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > > > On 02/05/2019 10:41 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2019-02-05 at 16:13 -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > > > > > On 02/05/2019

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 7.1.0 release - Please test the branch

On Wed, 2019-02-06 at 14:09 -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > On 02/05/2019 10:41 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-02-05 at 16:13 -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > > > On 02/05/2019 11:32 AM, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > > > > On 02/05/2019 11:26 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > > On

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 7.1.0 release - Please test the branch

On Tue, 2019-02-05 at 16:13 -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > On 02/05/2019 11:32 AM, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > > On 02/05/2019 11:26 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > On Tue, 2019-02-05 at 11:23 -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > > > > On 02/05/2019 08:07 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > > On

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 7.1.0 release - Please test the branch

On Tue, 2019-02-05 at 11:23 -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > On 02/05/2019 08:07 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-02-05 at 07:36 -0800, Tom Stellard via Release-testers > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > The release_70 branch is ready for the 7.1.0 release. I have updated the > > > version and

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 7.1.0 release - Please test the branch

On Tue, 2019-02-05 at 07:36 -0800, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote: > Hi, > > The release_70 branch is ready for the 7.1.0 release. I have updated the > version and pushed a fix for https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39427, > which is the only bug we will be fixing in this release. >

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [8.0.0 Release] rc1 has been tagged

On Wed, 2019-01-23 at 16:49 -0800, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Dear testers, > > 8.0.0-rc1 was just tagged (from the branch at r351980). > > It took a little longer than planned, but it's looking good. > > Please run the test script, share your results, and upload binaries. >

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [7.0.0 Release] rc3 has been tagged

On Mon, 2018-09-10 at 16:12 +0200, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers wrote: > Dear testers, > > 7.0.0-rc3 was just tagged (from branch revision r341805). > > No further release candidates are currently planned, so this is a > release candidate in the real sense: unless any serious issues >

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [6.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 3 tagged

W dniu pią, 23.02.2018 o godzinie 16∶14 +0100, użytkownik Hans Wennborg via Release-testers napisał: > Dear testers, > > 6.0.0-rc3 was just tagged, after r325901 on the branch. > > There are still a few open blockers, but I'm not sure we'll actually > end up blocking on all of them. So depending

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [6.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 2 tagged

W dniu śro, 07.02.2018 o godzinie 21∶51 +0100, użytkownik Hans Wennborg via Release-testers napisał: > Dear testers, > > There's been a lot of merges since rc1, and hopefully the tests are in > a better state now. > > 6.0.0-rc2 was just tagged, after r324506. > > Please test, let me know how it

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [6.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 1 tagged

W dniu śro, 17.01.2018 o godzinie 18∶53 +0100, użytkownik Hans Wennborg via Release-testers napisał: > Dear testers, > > Start your engines; 6.0.0-rc1 was just tagged. > > I know there are still open blockers and it's early in the process in > a way, but I'd like to find out where we are. Please

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] [5.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 4 tagged

W dniu śro, 30.08.2017 o godzinie 15∶22 -0700, użytkownik Hans Wennborg napisał: > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > W dniu wto, 29.08.2017 o godzinie 16∶52 -0700, użytkownik Hans Wennborg > > via llvm-dev napisał: > > > Hello testers, > > > > > >

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] [5.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 4 tagged

W dniu wto, 29.08.2017 o godzinie 16∶52 -0700, użytkownik Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev napisał: > Hello testers, > > 5.0.0-rc4 was just tagged. > > There were very few changes after rc3, and if nothing unexpected comes > up, this is what the final release will look like. > > Please test and let

Re: [lldb-dev] [cfe-dev] [5.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 2 tagged

W dniu czw, 10.08.2017 o godzinie 19∶00 -0700, użytkownik Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev napisał: > Dear testers, > > 5.0.0-rc2 was just tagged. > > I know we still have a bunch of open release blockers, but there has > been a lot of merged patches and I'd like to find out what the status > is. > >

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] [4.0.0 Release] Release Candidate 3 has been tagged

W dniu 02.03.2017, czw o godzinie 11∶47 -0800, użytkownik Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev napisał: > Hello testers, > > 4.0.0-rc3 was just tagged from the branch at r296762. > > This is a release candidate in the real sense: if no major issues show > up with this one, it is the version that will be

Re: [lldb-dev] [Release-testers] [Openmp-dev] [4.0 Release] Schedule and call for testers

On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 12:07:25 -0800 Hans Wennborg via lldb-dev wrote: > On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Renato Golin wrote: > > On 5 December 2016 at 19:56, Hans Wennborg wrote: > >> I'd like to avoid 4.1 because of the

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] [4.0 Release] Schedule and call for testers

On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 10:26:33 -0800 Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev wrote: > There's still plenty of time left, but I'd like to get the schedule > set before folks start disappearing for the holidays. > > Note that this release will also switch us to the new versioning >

Re: [lldb-dev] BoF: Let’s move to GitHub!

On Wed, 02 Nov 2016 17:17:01 -0700 Mehdi Amini via lldb-dev wrote: > Hi all, > > Here are the data I extracted from the survey, along with a large chunk of > the quotes (minus deduplications) arranged by “categories”. > > I plan to prune this a bit further and use

Re: [lldb-dev] [OS X]: building lldb with cmake

On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 15:09:13 + Zachary Turner via lldb-dev wrote: > Agree that a standalone build would be great to have working, it just > requires someone willing and able to come along and fix it :) I have it on my TODO but honestly speaking, LLDB is a bit of a

Re: [lldb-dev] [OS X]: building lldb with cmake

On Fri, 09 Sep 2016 12:37:01 -0700 (PDT) René J.V. Bertin via lldb-dev wrote: > Hi, > > I wanted to see how far I could get with a standalone build, so I copied the > missing CheckAtomic.cmake file into the installed cmake/llvm directory, and > tried to build lldb. >