From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 20 14:04:31 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B75BF1065673; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:04:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dimitry@andric.com) Received: from tensor.andric.com (cl-327.ede-01.nl.sixxs.net [IPv6:2001:7b8:2ff:146::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 799308FC0C; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:04:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2001:7b8:3a7:0:a592:f147:6cdf:9d5e] (unknown [IPv6:2001:7b8:3a7:0:a592:f147:6cdf:9d5e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by tensor.andric.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7051D5C43; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:04:30 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4BCDB475.6060609@andric.com> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:04:37 +0200 From: Dimitry Andric User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-US; rv:1.9.2.5pre) Gecko/20100417 Lanikai/3.1b2pre MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Roman Divacky References: <20100416160818.GA69460@freebsd.org> <4BC9E9D2.1040505@andric.com> <20100417173321.GA46116@freebsd.org> <4BC9FA7D.4060108@andric.com> <20100417181302.GA50462@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20100417181302.GA50462@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT]: ClangBSD is selfhosting, we need testers now X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:04:31 -0000 On 2010-04-17 20:13, Roman Divacky wrote: >>>> I'm using the llvm-devel-2.7.r100430 port. >> >> This is the current devel/llvm-devel port, AFAICS? The system itself >> runs -CURRENT as of r206706. > > sorry.. havent noticed that you wrote that in your first mail > > yes, i386 has a problem. I am just distilling the testcase and > I guess it will be fixed in upstream LLVM in a couple of hours. Tried again with llvm r101891, still the same error...