Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 13:04:49 -0500 From: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> To: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Cc: Thomas Mueller <mueller6724@bellsouth.net>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Status of llvm/clang 3.4? Message-ID: <CAPyFy2B=_1aCrrgdYAg%2BKF7OHfWoxLgAECZNR8gfi0rZg8B=7Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20140304172234.GA87591@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <634745.72215.bm@smtp120.sbc.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <20140304172234.GA87591@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4 March 2014 12:22, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 12:17:18PM +0000, Thomas Mueller wrote: > > What is the current status of clang, regarding known bugs, on FreeBSD-current? > > > > There were reports of www/firefox failing to build because of bug in llvm. > > Still broken of i386. Given the google results for "llvm ud2" > it is likely that clang will never be fixed. Except in this case it's just a plain old Clang bug, not a general undefined behaviour issue. The Clang PR is here: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19007 Dimitry has a patch to work around the issue in FreeBSD PR 187103: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=187103
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPyFy2B=_1aCrrgdYAg%2BKF7OHfWoxLgAECZNR8gfi0rZg8B=7Q>