[LLVMdev] 2.4 Pre-release (v1) Available for Testing

Kenneth Boyd zaimoni at zaimoni.com
Fri Oct 10 14:19:47 PDT 2008

Óscar Fuentes wrote:
> OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> writes:
>> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Tanya M. Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> wrote:
>>> Please COMPLETE ALL TESTING BY the end of the day on Oct. 19th!
>> Speaking of, we really need a test suite to test llvm itself, and not
>> llvm-gcc (to make sure llvm is correct on platforms without a gcc
>> build system).  The closest we have is the Fibinocci project and that
>> is anything but conclusive.
> I could add that to my CMake build system TODO, but so far I'm a bit
> skeptic about LLVM relevance on the non-Unix world.
LLVM will be mostly irrelevant on Windows as long as it doesn't have 
either a native-enough testing framework on Windows, or a build process 
that chokes on canonical Windows tools.  [Specifically, Perl.  I get the 
same errors with unpatched LLVM sources with both ActiveState, and 
built-from-tarball Perl 5.8.8 .  I'd guess the root problem is that 
canonical Windows builds of Perl use cmd rather than sh for the command 
> .... Is it really worth the trouble to support things like
> testing on systems that almost nobody (wants to) use?.
Assuming that the absence of testing is a sufficient cause for not 
wanting to use LLVM on that system, and the system is otherwise worth 
supporting: yes.


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list