Hi, I'm using LLVM myself, especially with clang and the static analyzer. I would like to see LLVM and clang separated, however the clang version is only available via svn and that depends on LLVM-svn very much. So I think it's better to build a general LLVM package with the gcc- frontend for stable development and a conflicting/providing llvm-clang package from svn. All that must be tested, if it works with otherllvm-realated packages (the llvm based D-compiler comes to mind) -T On Mon, 26 Oct 2009, Ranguvar wrote:
Hello,
I see that the package 'llvm' is in [community], is orphaned, and is out-of-date. I've spent considerable time working on packaging LLVM and its add-ons, the Clang C-family compiler front-end and the GCC frontend. Therefore, I'd like to help package LLVM. I already wrote a PKGBUILD for v2.6 of LLVM (the package we have is v2.5), and it also has a lot of fixes and niceties.
I'd like to discuss how best to proceed with LLVM -- whether Clang should be included in the llvm package or as an alternate package of LLVM and Clang, 'llvm-clang', stuff like that.
In fact, what may work best is if llvm could be dropped into the AUR, where I will then adopt it and update it (and potentially add 'llvm-clang' and such as is decided), and then if a TU wants it in [community] (which would make sense), it can be adopted by a TU.
Thanks! Devin Cofer, aka Ranguvar