Hello, Am Samstag, 24. Juni 2023 20:12:05 CEST schrieb Mohan R:
Hi,
On Sat, Jun 24, 2023 at 5:42 PM Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
Do you think anyone wants to risk screwing up their system after reading this first pinned comment[1]? I mostly use official PKGBUILD files if I ever want something new which is not available in the official repo. In my opinion, the method used in this AUR is supposed to be the official way of packaging llvm rather than splitting it into three PKGBUILDs.
It's not hard to install another version of LLVM in a different location or modify the PKGBUILD in doing so. I wonder why a git package doesn't do this in the 1st place, at least that's what I did when I had to package an older version of boost. Btw, you would have absolutely the same problem, too, when you increase the version in the upstream llvm PKGBUILDs, this case is an example against the practice of deriving from upstream PKGBUILDs without actually knowing what you're doing. Please inform yourself more about dynamic linking in general and ld.so.
I'm not saying having three PKGBUILD files is wrong, there must be a good reason for having three PKGBUILD for llvm which I dont understand. All I'm saying is the current packaging of llvm is not helping to bring latest llvm quickly to the end user, we cannot use the current official PKGBUILD for llvm/llvm-libs to update to 16.x
Maybe it is, it could still be a legacy remnant, though and it's good to question things looking for an explanation.
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/llvm-git#comment-822090
Thanks, Mohan R
Regards, Oskar