[PATCH] D25683: [docs] Increase minimum supported GCC version for building LLVM to 4.8

Fri Oct 28 06:53:42 PDT 2016

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 9:23 AM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote:
>
> I wanted to follow up to see whether the bot got upgraded - I never saw a formal revert request so I didn't do that. Hoping that it got resolved!

Tanya is working on getting the bot upgraded, but I have not heard an
ETA on when the upgrade will happen. Currently, the attribute
documentation is out of date on the public-facing web site because of
this. For instance r285391 added documentation for a new attribute,
and it's not reflected on
http://clang.llvm.org/docs/AttributeReference.html

I was holding off on the revert request to see if the bot could get
upgraded before the docs got stale, but it seems that time has passed
-- how bad would it be to revert this change temporarily and then
commit once the bot is solved?

~Aaron

>
> Thanks,
> Teresa
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 5:57 AM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> It turns out that there *may* be a problem with dropping GCC 4.7 right
>> >>> now. It seems that our documentation builder (which is not a public
>> >>> bot, unfortunately) that is used for building the public-facing
>> >>> attribute and compiler option documents is on a machine running GCC
>> >>> 4.7. I've alerted the person maintaining the bot about it, but I'm not
>> >>> certain how soon that builder will be switched over (it may already be
>> >>> in the process of switching, for all I know).
>> >>>
>> >>> I apologize for not recognizing this earlier, but it turns out that a
>> >>> recent commit broke that bot this morning, which is how I realized
>> >>> that the bot is still on GCC 4.7.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Ok do we need to revert this change? If so, how long would it take to get the bot upgraded to gcc 4.8? I am surprised the bot has been working though - this change was motivated by multiple reports of clang and LLVM not building with gcc 4.7. Or is it just building documentation?
>> >
>> > I think we may need to revert this change, but I'll know for sure
>> > tomorrow when the bot gives me a status report.
>>
>> I woke up this morning to a status report:
>>
>> Updated to revision 284575.
>> CMake Error at cmake/modules/CheckCompilerVersion.cmake:12 (message):
>>   Host GCC version must be at least 4.8!
>> Call Stack (most recent call first):
>>   cmake/config-ix.cmake:14 (include)
>>   CMakeLists.txt:517 (include)
>>
>> -- Configuring incomplete, errors occurred!
>> See also "/opt/llvm/build.attributes/CMakeFiles/CMakeOutput.log".
>> See also "/opt/llvm/build.attributes/CMakeFiles/CMakeError.log".
>>
>> So it looks like this patch effectively disables generation of the
>> public documentation for attributes and compiler options. We don't
>> change those so frequently that a revert is critical, but unless we
>> can get the bot updated reasonably soon, this would mean our public
>> docs for those two things are basically in stasis.
>>
>> I will continue to push for the bot upgrade, but I am not able to
>> control the process, only request it.
>>
>> ~Aaron
>>
>> > I'm a consumer of this
>> > bot, but not the producer of it. I don't have access to the bot, but
>> > it sends me an automatic status update after it builds the
>> > documentation, which is done on a daily schedule.
>> >
>> > I've emailed Tanya (who helped me get this builder set up) about
>> > upgrading the bot, but I've not heard back on the status or a
>> > timeline. AFAIK, the bot is only trying to build the clang-tblgen tool
>> > (and what it relies on), which probably explains why it hasn't broken
>> > until yesterday.
>> >
>> > ~Aaron
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Teresa
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> ~Aaron
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Renato Golin via llvm-commits
>> >>> <llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> >>> > rengolin accepted this revision.
>> >>> > rengolin added a comment.
>> >>> > This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D25683#573000, @jlebar wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> If someone really wants to use gcc 4.7, nothing is stopping them from going into cmake and commenting out this line.  :)
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Good point. :)
>> >>> >
>> >>> > LGTM. Thanks!
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > https://reviews.llvm.org/D25683
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > _______________________________________________
>> >>> > llvm-commits mailing list
>> >>> > llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
>> >>> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohnson at google.com | 408-460-2413
>
>
>
>
> --
> Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohnson at google.com | 408-460-2413