On 03/14/2013 04:40 PM, Jan Stolarek wrote:
If you type llc -version at the command line, it really says it's 3.2? You don't seem to believe me :)
[killy@xerxes : ~] llc --version LLVM (http://llvm.org/): LLVM version 3.2svn Optimized build with assertions. Built Mar 14 2013 (09:02:06). Default target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Host CPU: corei7
Registered Targets: arm - ARM cellspu - STI CBEA Cell SPU [experimental] cpp - C++ backend hexagon - Hexagon mblaze - MBlaze mips - Mips mips64 - Mips64 [experimental] mips64el - Mips64el [experimental] mipsel - Mipsel msp430 - MSP430 [experimental] nvptx - NVIDIA PTX 32-bit nvptx64 - NVIDIA PTX 64-bit ppc32 - PowerPC 32 ppc64 - PowerPC 64 sparc - Sparc sparcv9 - Sparc V9 thumb - Thumb x86 - 32-bit X86: Pentium-Pro and above x86-64 - 64-bit X86: EM64T and AMD64 xcore - XCore [killy@xerxes : ~] opt --version LLVM (http://llvm.org/): LLVM version 3.2svn Optimized build with assertions. Built Mar 14 2013 (09:02:06). Default target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Host CPU: corei7
So at this point we are clearly dealing with a system-specific
that come to my mind are: - I'm using LLVM 3.2 compiled from source, while you might be using a
repository - And I'm also using GHC 7.6.2 that I compiled by myself, instead of
Given that Austin and I have the stage 2 compiler failure and you don't, I think it is reasonable do double check :) problem. The possible differences pre-built version from the pre-built binaries available
at GHC web site. Are you using the binaries or do you also compiled your GHC from sources?
Janek
I built LLVM 3.2 from source, but from the release tarball, not subversion. Does your svn checkout correspond exactly to the source in the 3.2 release tarball? I also built both GHC 7.4.2 and 7.6.2 from source (release tarballs), both using the native back end. Since it's the stage 2 compiler that is failing, it's difficult to see why this would matter. Geoff