Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 40

Thread: Building Linux With LLVM/Clang Excites The Embedded World

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,102

    Default Building Linux With LLVM/Clang Excites The Embedded World

    Phoronix: Building Linux With LLVM/Clang Excites The Embedded World

    Building the Linux kernel with LLVM/Clang rather than GCC continues to be a big focus within the embedded Linux community...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTMyMzA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    485

    Default

    Won't change the Linux FOSS nuts who will continue to bash Apple and not realize that without Apple Clang doesn't exist and much of LLVM is still in the research phase.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    541

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    Won't change the Linux FOSS nuts who will continue to bash Apple and not realize that without Apple Clang doesn't exist and much of LLVM is still in the research phase.
    What does this even have to do with Apple?
    This is just about compiling Linux with another open source compiler.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ancurio View Post
    What does this even have to do with Apple?
    This is just about compiling Linux with another open source compiler.
    A lot of people hate and despise Clang simply because some engineers at Apple prototyped the original implementation (which Apple released as Open Source, though they were hardly required to do so; what was that about nothing being contributed back under permissive licenses?), Apple engineers continue to do much (not all) work on it, and Apple hired some of the lead LLVM folks, or because it has a reasonable-for-everyone license instead of the GPLv3. Never mind that Mesa uses it, Google uses it internally, and so on.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    A lot of people hate and despise Clang simply because some engineers at Apple prototyped the original implementation (which Apple released as Open Source, though they were hardly required to do so; what was that about nothing being contributed back under permissive licenses?), Apple engineers continue to do much (not all) work on it, and Apple hired some of the lead LLVM folks, or because it has a reasonable-for-everyone license instead of the GPLv3. Never mind that Mesa uses it, Google uses it internally, and so on.
    Yeah, elanthis which his proprietary bullshit. The sanest license is GPL which is proven, because it's the most popular one (and I don't give a shit if it's reasonable for crapple). Contribution to llvm is also much lower compared to GCC, so you can just stop your bullshit right here. When comes to your examples it's nothing compared to GCC, but as a troll you're aware of this. You were proven lying many times, maggot.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pawlerson View Post
    Yeah, elanthis which his proprietary bullshit. The sanest license is GPL which is proven, because it's the most popular one (and I don't give a shit if it's reasonable for crapple). Contribution to llvm is also much lower compared to GCC, so you can just stop your bullshit right here. When comes to your examples it's nothing compared to GCC, but as a troll you're aware of this. You were proven lying many times, maggot.
    The sanest OS is windows which is proven, because it's the most popular one.
    I hope I don't have to say more...

    And talking of LLVM being the holy CRAP - I hope you are aware of gallium using llvm. Open source graphics drivers (besides intel ones) would not be where they are if there wasn't LLVM.

    // edit:
    and my ignore list grows and grows...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    A lot of people hate and despise Clang simply because some engineers at Apple prototyped the original implementation (which Apple released as Open Source, though they were hardly required to do so; what was that about nothing being contributed back under permissive licenses?), Apple engineers continue to do much (not all) work on it, and Apple hired some of the lead LLVM folks, or because it has a reasonable-for-everyone license instead of the GPLv3. Never mind that Mesa uses it, Google uses it internally, and so on.
    What's wrong with hating Apple ? Everyone is free to hate it. I for one do hate Apple. And there's not a single reason, there are many.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    A lot of people hate and despise Clang simply because some engineers at Apple prototyped the original implementation (which Apple released as Open Source, though they were hardly required to do so; what was that about nothing being contributed back under permissive licenses?), Apple engineers continue to do much (not all) work on it, and Apple hired some of the lead LLVM folks, or because it has a reasonable-for-everyone license instead of the GPLv3. Never mind that Mesa uses it, Google uses it internally, and so on.
    I forgot to add: it seems you don't have same problems with proprietary licenses, hippo.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    Won't change the Linux FOSS nuts who will continue to bash Apple and not realize that without Apple Clang doesn't exist and much of LLVM is still in the research phase.
    There are many reasons to bash crapple. Why don't you go to crapple and say them to stop saying FUD about Linux? Or perhaps, tell some crapple fanboys to stop bashing it. We don't need Clang at all, but if it's here it can be useful. Crapple should be thankful for GCC.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    Won't change the Linux FOSS nuts who will continue to bash Apple and not realize that without Apple Clang doesn't exist and much of LLVM is still in the research phase.
    Nothing personal - I would bash any other patent troll just the same.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •