[cfe-dev] llvm/clang 3.0 on powerpc-darwin8

[Eli Friedman]

On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:44 AM, David Fang <fang at csl.cornell.edu> wrote:
> The patching is in the form of sed-1-liners, but would anyone be
> interested in a unidiff-patch?  I'm happy to share these, but I don't know
> whether my patches are "correct" beyond "works for me".

Feel free to send a patch; I'm not familiar enough with the CMake
stuff to review, but I'm sure someone else will want tot take a look.
See also http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html .

> At installation time (InstallScript of .info), I 'fixed' the dylibs and
> binaries to use references to their installed locations using
> install_name_tool.  (I've never had any luck with getting cmake to do this
> correctly and automatically, whereas libtool does the right thing.)  The
> resulting installed clang/llvm binaries run properly.
>
> Test results (llvm+clang).
> http://paste.lisp.org/display/126363#3
>   Expected Passes    : 6508
>   Expected Failures  : 36
>   Unsupported Tests  : 2955
>   Unexpected Passes  : 1
>   Unexpected Failures: 77
>
> How can I prepare a summary report of the failing and passing clang/llvm
> tests (is there a make target)?  and where is a good place to report the
> results for further scrutiny?  I've found an llvm-testresults mailing
> lists but those look like benchmark results.

There isn't really anything more here than you have already found; I'm
not sure why that isn't sufficient, though.  (Running "make check-all"
should be dumping some additional information onto the terminal,
though.)

We have a bot running PPC, and I have looked briefly at the failure
reports; a lot of the failing tests are just failing spuriously and
need to be fixed, but there are some which are crashing... if you're
interested in making clang usable, I'd suggest focusing on the ones
that crash first.

> ======= libc++abi, libc++ =======
>
> To make clang++ more use
> I haven't found much documentation for these other than:
> http://libcxx.llvm.org/
> http://libcxxabi.llvm.org/
>
> Are there any official versioned releases of these libraries?

There was a version of libcxx tagged along with LLVM 3.0, but no,
there isn't any official release.  If someone were interested,
proposing changes to http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html would
be the first step.

> libcxxabi provides no Makefile, so I just improvised my own. Which
> compiler should I be building this with? It references some c++ stdandard
> library headers, but without libc++, the only ones available are the
> system /usr/include/c++/4.0.0 and gcc-4.6's. One of the source files uses
> the __has_feature() clang feature, so it's not clear to me.

libcxxabi as a whole isn't really in a usable state; I would recommend
against using it at the moment.

-Eli