Package Details: llvm-git 18.0.0_r484887.953ae94149f0-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/llvm-git.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: llvm-git
Description: LLVM development version. includes clang and many other tools
Upstream URL: https://llvm.org/
Keywords: clang git lld lldb llvm polly
Licenses: custom:Apache 2.0 with LLVM Exception
Conflicts: clang, compiler-rt, lld, lldb, llvm, polly
Provides: aur-llvm-git, clang, clang-git, compiler-rt, compiler-rt-git, lld, lld-git, lldb, lldb-git, llvm, polly, polly-git
Submitter: yurikoles
Maintainer: rjahanbakhshi
Last Packager: rjahanbakhshi
Votes: 118
Popularity: 0.010912
First Submitted: 2018-12-05 13:56 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-04-17 08:17 (UTC)

Required by (2204)

Sources (2)

Pinned Comments

Lone_Wolf commented on 2021-08-16 11:26 (UTC)

When you have this package installed applications that are built against repo-llvm/clang WILL fail unless they are rebuild against this package.

This includes QTCreator, kdevelop , mesa, intel-compute-runtime, gnome-builder to name a few.

Lone_Wolf commented on 2020-08-22 12:18 (UTC) (edited on 2021-02-06 12:51 (UTC) by Lone_Wolf)

Archlinux currently has 3 llvm git implementations

  1. This package

    • It aims to provide a full llvm/clang compiler environment for development purposes.
    • Supports cross-compiling , bindings for external stuff (python, ocaml etc) , and some things not in extra-llvm.
    • intended to be used with archlinux core,extra & community repos
    • CONFLICTS with extra llvm/clang packages
    • Currently there's no repo with binary versions

  2. llvm-minimal-git

    • focuses on providing stuff needed for AUR mesa-git. Doesn't support cross-compiling or any bindings for external stuff like ocaml & python.
    • intended to be used with archlinux core,extra & community repos
    • compatible with extra llvm/clang packages
    • no repo with binary versions

  3. packages created & maintained by Lordheavy, an arch developer

    • intended to be used with archlinux testing repos
    • sometimes has problems on systems where testing repos are disabled
    • uses same package structure as llvm/clang in official repos
    • source
    • binary versions in LordHeavys unoffical repo

Lone_Wolf commented on 2019-04-12 20:41 (UTC) (edited on 2019-12-16 22:45 (UTC) by Lone_Wolf)

I've looked good at clang-trunk , llvm-svn, repo llvm/clang packages and think this package is now on route to become a worthy successor to llvm-svn .

  • llvm-libs-git holds the runtime libraries.

    It conflicts with the repo llvm-libs package. This is the only way to make sure the llvm linker from git is used, and that's needed for a full dev environment.

  • llvm-git

    has llvm , clang, compiler-rt, ocaml & python bindings, polly , lld , lldb .

The Package now uses a new environment variable to make ninja behave, NINJAFLAGS. If you want to use it adjust the snippet below to your desired values and add it to makepkg.conf.

Incase you are satisfied with ninja defaults you don't need to do anything.

# Add to makepkg.conf
# limit ninja to 20 jobs
# requires special code in PKGBUILD
# see ninja --help for additonal options
NINJAFLAGS="-j20"

The check() function fails rather often, but I do suggest to build with them. If build fails due to test failure you can add --nocheck to skip the tests.

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 .. 70 Next › Last »

kerberizer commented on 2016-09-05 18:32 (UTC)

[NOTICE] TL;DR: The regression tests should pass fine now. The problem which @electricprism was facing (and likely everyone else) persists for several days already. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to search for the root cause, but it's a simple matter of ld.so not finding the built shared lib when loading the test, so I've committed a simple fix which sets LD_LIBRARY_PATH appropriately while running "make check".

kerberizer commented on 2016-09-04 04:10 (UTC)

@electricprism, please see the pinned comment.

electricprism commented on 2016-09-04 04:06 (UTC)

http://pastebin.com/pfmd4f0P 6 errors, exiting. make[3]: *** [test/CMakeFiles/check-llvm.dir/build.make:58: test/CMakeFiles/check-llvm] Error 2 make[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:88672: test/CMakeFiles/check-llvm.dir/all] Error 2 make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:68845: test/CMakeFiles/check.dir/rule] Error 2 make: *** [Makefile:16694: check] Error 2 ==> ERROR: A failure occurred in check(). Aborting... ==> ERROR: Makepkg was unable to build llvm-svn.

kerberizer commented on 2016-08-14 20:08 (UTC)

[NOTICE] For those who use the binary repo and might be wondering why my key has expired: it actually had been duly extended on the day before it would expire and the new signature had been uploaded to the PGP keyservers. So, if the key shows to you as expired, you just need to refresh it in your pacman keyring, e.g. "sudo pacman-key --refresh-keys 0x76563F75679E4525".

kerberizer commented on 2016-08-11 00:39 (UTC) (edited on 2018-11-12 13:36 (UTC) by kerberizer)

[PINNED] IMPORTANT INFORMATION // PLEASE READ CAREFULLY

Please check the following page for information on:

  • possible problems with this package;
  • recommendations on how to build it;
  • availability of binary packages.

https://github.com/arch-llvm/llvm-svn

You may also use it for bug reports and pull requests.

kerberizer commented on 2016-07-25 18:28 (UTC) (edited on 2016-07-25 18:28 (UTC) by kerberizer)

@okabekudo, really glad to hear it, thank you! BTW, if you don't mind using other people's binary repos, you may save further time with @lordheavy's (who's an Arch Linux dev and TU) or mine... https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=212819

okabekudo commented on 2016-07-25 16:51 (UTC)

@kerberizer I actually did yep with the -c flag but I tried again. With deleting my chroot folder and all and then it successfully built! Man I'm happy. No more waiting hours for llvm-svn to update :D

kerberizer commented on 2016-07-25 00:52 (UTC)

@okabekudo, I'm not seeing any problems on my build box. Are you building in a clean chroot?

kerberizer commented on 2016-07-24 19:51 (UTC)

@okabekudo, strange, indeed. The last automated build that I run every 6 hours has passed successfully. I'll start it manually and see if there might be some change upstream that is causing the problem.

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 .. 70 Next › Last »