Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

switch Clang from broken Ubuntu PPA to upstream binary release #654

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 13, 2016

Conversation

efidler
Copy link
Contributor

@efidler efidler commented Jun 8, 2016

This should fix the Travis clang builds

travis-ci/travis-ci#6120

@efidler efidler force-pushed the travis-clang branch 3 times, most recently from 0503f57 to 5954057 Compare June 8, 2016 18:28
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jun 8, 2016

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 0503f57 on efidler:travis-clang into e6895ec on miloyip:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jun 8, 2016

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 5954057 on efidler:travis-clang into e6895ec on miloyip:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jun 8, 2016

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 659a3e7 on efidler:travis-clang into e6895ec on miloyip:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jun 8, 2016

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling e201552 on efidler:travis-clang into e6895ec on miloyip:master.

@miloyip
Copy link
Collaborator

miloyip commented Jun 10, 2016

This seems not working in Travis. Any idea?

@efidler
Copy link
Contributor Author

efidler commented Jun 10, 2016

Yeah, it's not working yet. The current issue is that the 32-bit builds need 32-bit libc++, which isn't in the upstream binary x86_64 release of clang+llvm. What do you think of just using the clang 3.5 included in Ubuntu trusty?

@miloyip
Copy link
Collaborator

miloyip commented Jun 10, 2016

If clang 3.5 can compile properly, I think we can temporarily fallback to that.

@efidler efidler force-pushed the travis-clang branch 2 times, most recently from 0d62e0e to cad91d3 Compare June 10, 2016 17:28
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.02%) to 99.979% when pulling cad91d3 on efidler:travis-clang into 6f5e83d on miloyip:master.

@efidler efidler force-pushed the travis-clang branch 4 times, most recently from d027b2b to 606ee73 Compare June 10, 2016 19:18
This should fix the Travis clang builds, since the upstream LLVM apt
repo is down.
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jun 10, 2016

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling d1697f7 on efidler:travis-clang into 6f5e83d on miloyip:master.

@miloyip miloyip merged commit 024fc49 into Tencent:master Jun 13, 2016
@miloyip miloyip mentioned this pull request Jun 14, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants