[cfe-dev] Maintaining a clang fork
Philip Reames via cfe-dev
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Mar 10 16:03:59 PST 2016
On 03/10/2016 12:42 PM, Hal Finkel via cfe-dev wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Nat! via cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> To: cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 10:41:59 AM
>> Subject: [cfe-dev] Maintaining a clang fork
>> I am just wondering if anyone has experiences maintaining a clang
>> and how you do it ?
>> It wasn't very easy for me to move from 3.7 to 3.8, since there were
>> about 2000 commits I had to merge. git wasn't too clever with the
>> either, finding stuff to merge in files I had never touched. In the
>> I reversed my mode of operation, and merged into master from my
>> using -strategy ours to keep mainline intact and preferred to reedit
>> many of my changes.
>> It would appear advantageous to have some sort of continous
>> where each commit from mainline is automatically merged into my
>> and then a compile is attempted. If things break, the integration
>> Otherwise it just keeps on churning. If this makes things really
>> though, I don't know. Does this exist ?
> When I've done this I've had scripts that do a nightly pull/merge followed by a build and test. If any of that fails, I'd get an e-mail. In my experience, doing this between 3-4am central time works best.
We have an automated script which runs twice a day and does an automated
pull/merge/test. If everything succeeds, it directly pushes into our
local tree. We've found this succeeds roughly 50% of the time and that
the rest need (mostly minor) hand resolution. I'd generally say that a
faster merge interval leads to less pain overall.
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
More information about the cfe-dev