Need 2.7 release team volunteers

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Need 2.7 release team volunteers

Tanya Lattner
I'm looking for someone to qualify x86-32 linux for 2.7 and beyond. 

If you want a basic idea of how the release process works, see this:
http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html

Please email me if you are interested! 

Thanks,
Tanya

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Need 2.7 release team volunteers

R P Herrold
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010, Tanya Lattner wrote:

> I'm looking for someone to qualify x86-32 linux for 2.7 and beyond.
>
> If you want a basic idea of how the release process works, see this:
> http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html
>
> Please email me if you are interested!

I looked at the mentioned page.  I see in the coverage matrix:

Architecture OS compiler
--------------------------------
...
x86-32 Linux gcc 4.2.X, gcc 4.3.X
...
x86-64 Linux gcc 4.2.X, gcc 4.3.X

and have a couple questions

1. As clang went self hosting, should it also be added
throughout the matrix to spot regressions?

2. CentOS (RHEL) 5 mainline is at:
  gcc-4.1.2
with engineering previews at 4.4.0

4.1.2 is assumedly less featureful than the two mentioned
versions, and 4.4.0 later --- will tests on such suffice?

[Debian testing seems to be at 4.3.4]


I already run a 'nightly', and will graft in the testing
mentioned at
  http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html

I also get warnings on doco matters -- shall I file those as
well?

-- Russ herrold
_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Need 2.7 release team volunteers

Anton Korobeynikov
Hello

> 2.      CentOS (RHEL) 5 mainline is at:
>        gcc-4.1.2
> with engineering previews at 4.4.0
>
> 4.1.2 is assumedly less featureful than the two mentioned
> versions, and 4.4.0 later --- will tests on such suffice?
Please double check - 4.1.2 might be broken:
http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#brokengcc

--
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Need 2.7 release team volunteers

Diego Iastrubni
BTW,

I am testinbg gcc 4.4.1 on MingW and I must admit that it's not working perfectly. On the other hand I *am* testing it by compiling Qt4 which is a ... "interesting test case"... but then again, the problems are quite predictable but not understandable.

Which tests can I run on my side for testing clang over mingw?

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello

> 2.      CentOS (RHEL) 5 mainline is at:
>        gcc-4.1.2
> with engineering previews at 4.4.0
>
> 4.1.2 is assumedly less featureful than the two mentioned
> versions, and 4.4.0 later --- will tests on such suffice?
Please double check - 4.1.2 might be broken:
http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#brokengcc

--
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev


_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Need 2.7 release team volunteers

Anton Korobeynikov
Hello, Diego

> I am testinbg gcc 4.4.1 on MingW and I must admit that it's not working
> perfectly. On the other hand I *am* testing it by compiling Qt4 which is a
> ... "interesting test case"... but then again, the problems are quite
> predictable but not understandable.
Well, one can easily expect so.
For example, release binaries of llvm/llvm-gcc on mingw are still
compiled with mingw gcc 3.4.5 mostly due to the problems of stability
of newer gcc for mingw.

--
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University
_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Need 2.7 release team volunteers

Diego Iastrubni
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:41 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <[hidden email]> wrote:
Well, one can easily expect so.
For example, release binaries of llvm/llvm-gcc on mingw are still
compiled with mingw gcc 3.4.5 mostly due to the problems of stability
of newer gcc for mingw.

Sorry, but this does not convince me.

gcc -> clang.c -> clang ->  Qt.c -> Qt.exe

You say that the clang.exe compiled using mingw 4.4.1, creates bad code, which in turns clang.exe miscompiles some code...? If that would have been true - I would have seen it in my Qt/mingw4.4.1 binaries. IMHO, this means clang is misbehaving.

For me, easy to test. Just recompile clang using cl.exe, and with this compiler, compile Qt. Now the 250,000 question: how to compile clang using cmake if also gcc is in path?

I will issue a recompilation this week and report probably by Saturday.


_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Need 2.7 release team volunteers

Vincent R.
In reply to this post by Anton Korobeynikov
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:41:58 +0300, Anton Korobeynikov
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hello, Diego
>
>> I am testinbg gcc 4.4.1 on MingW and I must admit that it's not working
>> perfectly. On the other hand I *am* testing it by compiling Qt4 which
is
>> a
>> ... "interesting test case"... but then again, the problems are quite
>> predictable but not understandable.
> Well, one can easily expect so.
> For example, release binaries of llvm/llvm-gcc on mingw are still
> compiled with mingw gcc 3.4.5 mostly due to the problems of stability
> of newer gcc for mingw.

I am testing a lot clang on mingw and I confirm that toolchain from
mingw.org(4.4.0) has problems with it that's why I am using toolchain
from mingw-w64(configured to generated x86 code).
I will release an installer very soon.
_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Need 2.7 release team volunteers

Diego Iastrubni
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Vincent Richomme <[hidden email]> wrote:
I am testing a lot clang on mingw and I confirm that toolchain from
mingw.org(4.4.0) has problems with it that's why I am using toolchain
from mingw-w64(configured to generated x86 code).
I will release an installer very soon.

Vincent, can you also test with these packages?
http://www.tdragon.net/recentgcc/

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Need 2.7 release team volunteers

Tanya Lattner
In reply to this post by R P Herrold

On Feb 23, 2010, at 8:24 AM, R P Herrold wrote:

> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010, Tanya Lattner wrote:
>
>> I'm looking for someone to qualify x86-32 linux for 2.7 and beyond.
>>
>> If you want a basic idea of how the release process works, see this:
>> http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html
>>
>> Please email me if you are interested!
>
> I looked at the mentioned page.  I see in the coverage matrix:
>
> Architecture OS compiler
> --------------------------------
> ...
> x86-32 Linux gcc 4.2.X, gcc 4.3.X
> ...
> x86-64 Linux gcc 4.2.X, gcc 4.3.X
>
> and have a couple questions
>
> 1. As clang went self hosting, should it also be added throughout the matrix to spot regressions?
>

We'll do it for the next release.

> 2. CentOS (RHEL) 5 mainline is at:
> gcc-4.1.2
> with engineering previews at 4.4.0
>
> 4.1.2 is assumedly less featureful than the two mentioned versions, and 4.4.0 later --- will tests on such suffice?
>

4.4 is fine. Those are just a list of acceptable compilers to qualify. We dropped 3.4 basically.

> [Debian testing seems to be at 4.3.4]
>
>
> I already run a 'nightly', and will graft in the testing mentioned at
> http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html
>

Awesome, I typically send out mail to the general list to do testing and will be sending one shortly.

> I also get warnings on doco matters -- shall I file those as well?
>

The doxygen stuff needs to be cleaned up, but it wont be a release blocker. If you are talking about other warnings, you can file bugs, but they wont be release blockers.

Thanks,
Tanya



_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Need 2.7 release team volunteers

R P Herrold
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010, Tanya Lattner wrote:

>> I already run a 'nightly', and will graft in the testing mentioned at
>> http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html
>
> Awesome, I typically send out mail to the general list to do testing and will be sending one shortly.

I was working through this webpage, this week, and find that I
am not understanding what is being said.  Is there a tester
here who has pushed the automation of this into a script that
might be shared here or privately with me?

I'll keep plugging at it, but that is a more 'explorational'
approach and will be slower than 'cribbing' from the worked
example of another.  As I am long out of school, it is perhaps
all right to read another's answers on homework  ;)

-- Russ herrold
_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Need 2.7 release team volunteers

Tanya Lattner

On Mar 13, 2010, at 7:01 AM, R P Herrold wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010, Tanya Lattner wrote:
>
>>> I already run a 'nightly', and will graft in the testing mentioned at
>>> http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html
>>
>> Awesome, I typically send out mail to the general list to do testing and will be sending one shortly.
>
> I was working through this webpage, this week, and find that I am not understanding what is being said.  Is there a tester here who has pushed the automation of this into a script that might be shared here or privately with me?
>
> I'll keep plugging at it, but that is a more 'explorational' approach and will be slower than 'cribbing' from the worked example of another.  As I am long out of school, it is perhaps all right to read another's answers on homework  ;)
>
> -- Russ herrold

If you want to qualify for a specific target, then you will need to do everthing listed on that page. I have a script to do a lot of it automatically and another to diff nightly tester results.

Typically, what I ask of the community is to do a subset. So, most will just take the pre-packaged binaries that are released as a pre-release and do the testing with those. Or some will build only release mode and do testing. I'll send out instructions for this once the pre-release1 has been released to the community.

So are you actually interested in becoming a part of the release team and doing a full qualification for some target or did you just want to do community testing? I interpreted your response as wanting to do community testing, but perhaps I was wrong.

If you wanted to become a part of the release team, please send me mail offlist with the targets you want to qualify.

Thanks,
Tanya
_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev