Hi,
I am trying to build a specific software and the process requires LLVM 6.0 or later. Leap 15.0 has LLVM 5.
Looking at https://software.opensuse.org/package/llvm I have found that it is available as an official release in Tumbleweed. Is it safe to install that one? Or would you rather recommend the “Experimental” version from devel:tools:compiler in Leap 15.0 section? Or anything else?
Why take a chance?
Your search link has a link to a supported 6.01 package from the devel:tools.compiler repo built for LEAP 15.0.
TSU
I am always cautious with non-official repos as I have read one should be careful. Is that wrong?
Your search link has a link to a supported 6.01 package from the devel:tools.compiler repo built for LEAP 15.0.
What do you mean “supported”? If it is something official and stable - why is it not in the main repos?
I meant that the repo I’m pointing you to is a community supported repo, and not a from an individual User.
That should provide you with the extra assurance that the package was built properly and from people who know what they’re doing.
Someone somewhere has got to fix these labels at https://software.opensuse.org/search that suddenly changed with the new page layout themes.
People think that packages in “experimental” are bleeding edge and unreliable when they’re not.
People think that “community” repos are more reliable than experimental, and they’re not.
And, these labels and definitions are completely contrary to the entire history of FOSS, why is openSUSE revising long standing definitions?
This really has to be corrected, and ASAP. It might or might not have been a mistake in the beginning but is no longer just an idiosyncrasy, this is as bad as bad documentation.
Community should always mean where you can find organized groups of individuals, not groups of individuals. So, for instance the people who support the Pacman repo is a community, but Joe Schmoe who builds a really nice package is not by the same definition unless he contributes to a larger group and then the <group> is a comminity. But no, currently our “search” calls Pacman repos “experimental” instead of “community.” And, all our other openSUSE documentation continues to <properly> call Pacman a “community repo”
IMO,
TSU
Thanks for the info. So along these lines it is unclear what exactly experimental stands for and who should clarify it?
Nah,
It’s either a bad mistake when the site was updated and no one has owned up to it,
or
Someone just got confused.
Either way,
It’s a bad issue that has been raised a number of times but AFAIK no one has responded.
Maybe there is a question about who has the authority to do something about it.
Thing is, once a fix can be authorized, I can image a number of ways to actually implement the fix in seconds (plus whatever quality control might be required), it’s not like this kind of thing would require any kind of significant effort.
TSU