Because the package is _orphaned_ in community, so I figured this would be the best route? Should I open a feature request instead? On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Ionut Biru wrote:

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Ranguvar wrote:

...

Hello,

The package 'llvm' is an orphaned [communuity] package. I'd like to request that it me moved to the AUR so I can maintain it (I have an update and overhaul ready) and I can also create a 'clang' package for it. (split package for llvm AND clang) Then it can be adopted by a TU if they want to bring it back into [community].

Thanks :)

if you have an PKGBUILD which has split support , why don't you open a feature request instead of asking to be moved in aur?

-- Ionut

2009/10/31 Ionut Biru

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Ranguvar wrote:

...

Because the package is _orphaned_ in community, so I figured this would be the best route? Should I open a feature request instead?

orphaned doesn't mean that are unmaintained. the best thing is to send on bugtracker. all bugs from orphaned packages are assigned to me and daniel

When orphaned, another TU can update the orphan as and when needed. Packages are dropped when they have been orphaned for too long and have garnered 0 interest in keeping up-to-date. I don't think that's the case with this one.

Andrea Scarpino wrote:

On 30/10/2009, Ranguvar wrote:

...

Hello,

The package 'llvm' is an orphaned [communuity] package. I'd like to request that it me moved to the AUR so I can maintain it (I have an update and overhaul ready) and I can also create a 'clang' package for it. (split package for llvm AND clang) Then it can be adopted by a TU if they want to bring it back into [community].

I vote for "move it on AUR"

I believe it should be kept in [community] as it takes a considerable amount of time to compile (around 10 minutes on a C2D 2.66 GHz, using both cores). I must say I know close to nothing about LLVM, but I'm willing to maintain it and learn along the way. So, unless a more knowledgeable TU shows interest, I'll adopt it in [community] and upload a new package (based on Ranguvar's PKGBUILD) in the following weeks.

On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 2:36 AM, Evangelos Foutras wrote:

Evangelos Foutras wrote:

...

Andrea Scarpino wrote:

...

On 30/10/2009, Ranguvar wrote:

...

Hello,

The package 'llvm' is an orphaned [communuity] package.  I'd like to request that it me moved to the AUR so I can maintain it (I have an update and overhaul ready) and I can also create a 'clang' package for it. (split package for llvm AND clang)  Then it can be adopted by a TU if they want to bring it back into [community].

I vote for "move it on AUR"

I believe it should be kept in [community] as it takes a considerable amount of time to compile (around 10 minutes on a C2D 2.66 GHz, using both cores).

I must say I know close to nothing about LLVM, but I'm willing to maintain it and learn along the way. So, unless a more knowledgeable TU shows interest, I'll adopt it in [community] and upload a new package (based on Ranguvar's PKGBUILD) in the following weeks.

I've uploaded llvm 2.6-1 to [community-testing]. It doesn't include clang, as I believe it should be built as a separate package. I think it's possible to download both llvm and clang tarballs, place clang inside the tools subdirectory and run `make install' from there. We'll need to investigate this possibility.

Testing of the uploaded packages would be appreciated. :)

I've found an error: [ilcra1989@acheron ~]$ llvmc test.c llvmc: Can't find program 'llvm-gcc'

Ranguvar wrote:

That's LLVM trying to use the a frontend which you don't have. You can install llvm-gcc to make it work, but I bet the AUR package isn't compatible with our new LLVM yet, I'll work on fixing that for the AUR maintainer once we finalize LLVM 2.6.

Here's a reworked LLVM/Clang PKGBUILD, with some improvements from Evangelos's PKGBUILD (and a number of fixes to it, as well).

I removed the perl dep because perl's in [core], for example.

On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Imanol Celaya < ornitorrincos@archlinux-es.org> wrote:

...

On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 2:36 AM, Evangelos Foutras wrote:

...

Evangelos Foutras wrote:

...

Andrea Scarpino wrote:

...

On 30/10/2009, Ranguvar wrote:

...

Hello,

The package 'llvm' is an orphaned [communuity] package. I'd like to request that it me moved to the AUR so I can maintain it (I have an update and overhaul ready) and I can also create a 'clang' package for it. (split package for llvm AND clang) Then it can be adopted by a TU if they

want

...

...

...

...

to bring it back into [community].

I vote for "move it on AUR"

I believe it should be kept in [community] as it takes a considerable amount of time to compile (around 10 minutes on a C2D 2.66 GHz, using

both

...

...

cores).

I must say I know close to nothing about LLVM, but I'm willing to

maintain

...

...

it and learn along the way. So, unless a more knowledgeable TU shows interest, I'll adopt it in [community] and upload a new package (based

on

...

...

Ranguvar's PKGBUILD) in the following weeks.

I've uploaded llvm 2.6-1 to [community-testing]. It doesn't include

clang,

...

as I believe it should be built as a separate package. I think it's

possible

...

to download both llvm and clang tarballs, place clang inside the tools subdirectory and run `make install' from there. We'll need to investigate this possibility.

Testing of the uploaded packages would be appreciated. :)

I've found an error:

[ilcra1989@acheron ~]$ llvmc test.c llvmc: Can't find program 'llvm-gcc'

Let's continue the discussion on the related report on the bug tracker. http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/16920