Package Details: llvm-ocaml-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: OCaml bindings for LLVM
Upstream URL: https://llvm.org/
Keywords: clang git lld lldb llvm polly
Licenses: custom:Apache 2.0 with LLVM Exception
Conflicts: llvm-ocaml
Provides: llvm-ocaml
Submitter: yurikoles
Maintainer: rjahanbakhshi
Last Packager: rjahanbakhshi
Votes: 118
Popularity: 0.005241
First Submitted: 2018-12-05 13:56 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-04-17 08:17 (UTC)

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 .. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 .. 70 Next › Last »

nstgc commented on 2020-03-03 18:42 (UTC) (edited on 2020-03-03 20:11 (UTC) by nstgc)

I happen to agree with YuriKoles. If we, the end user, decide to ignore warnings we can, but they are there for a reason, even if it's a bad reason. I appreciate the effort, particularly identifying a missing dep, but it seems just having us add --nocheck is the better solution. I admit I'm not sure how this would be done (I've never made anything with the ABS), but perhaps on a failed check print a message about this being "normal" and that --nocheck is "safe"?

Also, it still still to be failing without --nocheck. I pulled the changes, and tried to clean build the package without --nocheck and I'm getting the same failures as before.

yurikoles commented on 2020-03-03 18:35 (UTC)

Hi @Lone_Wolf,

I'm sorry, but I think that selectively disabling tests makes no sense, if LLDB test fail it should be reported upstream instead of just pretending that there are no errors.

Lone_Wolf commented on 2020-03-03 18:16 (UTC)

check() function needed python module psutil, added that as checkdepend. This took care of 2+ unexpected failures, all remaing failures were in lldb-tests .

The lldb tests have shown the same failures for sometime now, and I haven't been able to figure out what causes them. I've disabled them, so for now the package should build without check() failures.

Lone_Wolf commented on 2020-03-03 00:17 (UTC)

Failures during check() are unfortunately rather common for this package, check bottom lines of the pinned comment.

nstgc commented on 2020-03-02 02:14 (UTC) (edited on 2020-03-02 02:15 (UTC) by nstgc)

I'm having trouble compiling this. I'm not using an AUR helper and my Arch (not Manjaro) install is up-to-date.

Failing Tests (4):
LLVM :: tools/opt-viewer/basic.test
LLVM :: tools/opt-viewer/filter.test
LLVM :: tools/opt-viewer/suppress.test
LLVM :: tools/opt-viewer/unicode-function-name.test

Lone_Wolf commented on 2019-12-16 22:39 (UTC)

Lots of failures in check() function (check-clang-tools) , but none in build() function.

Try adding ---cleanbuild to the makepkg command (or remove $srcdir yourself before building).

evernow commented on 2019-12-16 14:52 (UTC)

Cannot build, get this c++: error: git: No such file or directory c++: error: working: No such file or directory c++: error: on: No such file or directory c++: error: it/llvm-git/src/_build/./lib: No such file or directory [278/7794] Building CXX object lib/MC/MCParser/CMakeFiles/LLVMMCParser.dir/AsmParser.cpp.o ninja: build stopped: subcommand failed. ==> ERROR: A failure occurred in build(). Aborting...

Lone_Wolf commented on 2019-11-18 14:14 (UTC)

Confirmed and corrected. There were also other corrections needed because of python 3.8.

Sinistar commented on 2019-11-17 16:47 (UTC) (edited on 2019-11-17 16:48 (UTC) by Sinistar)

llvm-ocaml-git needs to be added to pkgname

Lone_Wolf commented on 2019-11-13 15:10 (UTC)

Ocaml support is now (back) in its own sub-package.

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 .. 70 Next › Last »