For 2.6 to really be a useful, we need this bug fixed:
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=4963
Would it be possible to get this merged into 2.6?
-Tomas
Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
For 2.6 to really be a useful, we need this bug fixed:
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=4963
Would it be possible to get this merged into 2.6?
While we're at it, what about:
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3239
This is a real nuisance, as people regularly build LLVM in a way
(--enable-pic, which even is the default now) which makes the JIT create
wrong code on x86-32. I've seen this on Ubuntu and Fedora Core 10
(thankfully Michel Salim has fixed the FC LLVM packages now).
Albert
I requested it to be merged in, thanks.
-Chris
Albert Graef wrote:
Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
For 2.6 to really be a useful, we need this bug fixed:
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=4963
Would it be possible to get this merged into 2.6?
While we're at it, what about:http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3239
This is a real nuisance, as people regularly build LLVM in a way
(--enable-pic, which even is the default now) which makes the JIT create
wrong code on x86-32. I've seen this on Ubuntu and Fedora Core 10
(thankfully Michel Salim has fixed the FC LLVM packages now).
I think this one is fixed already in TOT.
Paul
Hello, Albert
While we're at it, what about:
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3239This is a real nuisance, as people regularly build LLVM in a way
(--enable-pic, which even is the default now) which makes the JIT create
wrong code on x86-32. I've seen this on Ubuntu and Fedora Core 10
(thankfully Michel Salim has fixed the FC LLVM packages now).
This is dup of PR3801. Much better fix (as attached to PR) was already
integrated into 2.6 & mainline.
Anton Korobeynikov wrote:
This is dup of PR3801. Much better fix (as attached to PR) was already
integrated into 2.6 & mainline.
Hi Anton, that's really good news, thanks!