Re: Any interest in buildfarm a member using Apple's llvm-gcc-4.2 or clang?

I'll set up one or two more 'machines' if there is interest (Snow
Leopard)

% /Developer/usr/bin/llvm-gcc-4.2 --version
i686-apple-darwin10-llvm-gcc-4.2 (GCC) 4.2.1 (Based on Apple Inc.
build 5646) (LLVM build 2118)

llvm-gcc-4.2 currently fails during check for the known directory
problem under Snow Leopard as the regular gcc does. I tried HEAD,
REL8_4_STABLE and REL8_3_STABLE.

% /Developer/usr/bin/clang --version
clang version 1.0 (http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/tags/Apple/clang-23 exported
)

clang fails to compile on HEAD, so I did no more checking on it.

clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-no-cpp-precomp'
clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-fwrapv'
clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-c'
clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-no-cpp-precomp'
clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-I/opt/local/
include'
clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-fwrapv'
clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-I.'
clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-I../../../src/
include'
clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-I/opt/local/
include/libxml2'
In file included from gram.c:1:
In file included from gram.y:29784:
scan.l:16639:83: error: invalid conversion '%m' [-Wformat]
elog_start("scan.l", 978, __func__), elog_finish(20,
"base_yylex_init() failed: %m");

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~
1 diagnostic generated.
make[3]: *** [gram.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** [parser-recursive] Error 2
make[1]: *** [all] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2
Branch: HEAD
Stage Make failed with status 2

Later,
Rob

On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 03:29:29PM -0600, Robert Creager wrote:
>
> I'll set up one or two more 'machines' if there is interest (Snow
> Leopard)

The more, the merrier :)

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Robert Creager <robert(at)logicalchaos(dot)org> writes:
> I'll set up one or two more 'machines' if there is interest (Snow
> Leopard)

LLVM, perhaps, though are you sure that llvm and gcc aren't the
same thing under the hood on SL? I thought I'd read somewhere that
Apple had turned gcc into a wrapper around the llvm code generator.

> clang fails to compile on HEAD, so I did no more checking on it.

I think that whatever version Apple is shipping on the DVD is probably
not going to be very useful for us. Grzegorz Jaskiewicz was using
bleeding-edge clang sources and still hitting bugs. Putting it in the
buildfarm might be a good idea in a few more months, when more-stable
clang versions are available.

regards, tom lane

On Sep 8, 2009, at 4:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

> Robert Creager <robert(at)logicalchaos(dot)org> writes:
>> I'll set up one or two more 'machines' if there is interest (Snow
>> Leopard)
>
> LLVM, perhaps, though are you sure that llvm and gcc aren't the
> same thing under the hood on SL? I thought I'd read somewhere that
> Apple had turned gcc into a wrapper around the llvm code generator.

Well, the versions reported are definitely different.

% gcc --version
i686-apple-darwin10-gcc-4.2.1 (GCC) 4.2.1 (Apple Inc. build 5646)

Robert(at)dhcp-ubrm05-218-133:/usr/local/src/build-farm-3.2_llvm
% /Developer/usr/llvm-gcc-4.2/bin/llvm-gcc-4.2 --version
i686-apple-darwin10-llvm-gcc-4.2 (GCC) 4.2.1 (Based on Apple Inc.
build 5646) (LLVM build 2118)

And the llvm tools you only get with the Xcode install, and the sizes
of the two gcc compilers are very different.

And, the llvm version takes the -flto, where the normal one doesn't:

/Developer/usr/llvm-gcc-4.2/bin/llvm-gcc-4.2 -flto main.c -o main_llvm
/usr/bin/gcc-4.2 -flto main.c -o main_gcc
cc1: error: unrecognized command line option "-flto"
make: *** [main_gcc] Error 1

-flto
Enable LLVM Link Time Optimization.

And, the binaries are different for the same simple program.

So, I'm convinced they are different (where I wasn't sure before).

Later,
Rob