On 12.02.2016 00:05, Nicolai Hähnle wrote:
> On 10.02.2016 22:59, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>
>> So in Fedora rawhide we are now building llvm 3.7.1 into the lots of
>> little shared libraries format.
>
> Barring all the other problems, are you sure this is a good idea? I
> remember somebody mentioning
On 12 February 2016 at 01:51, Tom Stellard wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 01:59:25PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> So in Fedora rawhide we are now building llvm 3.7.1 into the lots of
>> little shared libraries format.
>>
>
> This configuration is only recommended for developers.
>
> S
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 01:59:25PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> Hey,
>
> So in Fedora rawhide we are now building llvm 3.7.1 into the lots of
> little shared libraries format.
>
This configuration is only recommended for developers.
See the documentation for BUILD_SHARED_LIBS:BOOL here:
http://
On 10.02.2016 22:59, Dave Airlie wrote:
Hey,
So in Fedora rawhide we are now building llvm 3.7.1 into the lots of
little shared libraries format.
Barring all the other problems, are you sure this is a good idea? I
remember somebody mentioning that at least LLVM's own test suite runs
much slo
Hey,
So in Fedora rawhide we are now building llvm 3.7.1 into the lots of
little shared libraries format.
However I'm running into a major problem with the fact that sometimes
dlclose isn't dropping all the LLVM libraries from the address space
of the process.
We have a sequence like this:
a) X
