[LLVMdev] Build Failure

dag at cray.com dag at cray.com
Wed Jan 2 13:50:14 PST 2013

David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> writes:

>>> There's little effort to keep the GCC build warning clean,
>> Why?  It seems like a pertty important compiler to support.
> It has some silly warnings (at least in some versions) that we don't
> want to workaround/suppress. Arguably we could have the build system
> check version information & suppress certain known-bad warnings on
> specific GCC versions.

That would be ideal, but honestly in my experience there are very few
gcc warnings that should be ignored.  Which ones do you think should be

> Honestly we need to cleanup the buildbot infrastructure in general.
> That's a work in progress. David Dean's bringing up the new
> phase-based build infrastructure & my hope is that we'll use the
> transition to a separate buildmaster running that infrastructure as a
> chance to hold a higher bar for builders/slaves and take some time to
> really assess where/how we'll allocate our build resources, including
> things like building with -Werror, C++11, etc.

What kind of higher bar?  I'm interested in contributing resources for a
build slave (particularly for -Werror) but I can't guarantee 100%
uptime.  What will be the requirements for a build slave?

>> This is with 4.7.1, BTW.
> & your -Werror build of Clang+LLVM is otherwise clean apart from that?

I'm not sure since I didn't build with -k.  I patched the warning and
now it's building.  I'll commit the fix if everything works.


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list