I would guess llvm-clang, since a bit of Googling now tells me that:
The goal of the Clang project is to create a new C, C++, Objective C and
Objective C++ front-end for the LLVM compiler. You can get and build the
source today.
So clang is t frontent for llvm, so llvm-clang seems likely.
–
Good luck.
If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
show your appreciation and click on the star below…
Hi
Not for clang, use the provides option with zypper;
zypper se -x --provides clang
S | Name | Summary | Type
--+------------+-------------------------+--------
i | llvm-clang | CLANG frontend for LLVM | package
The goal of the Clang project is to create a new C, C++, Objective C andObjective C++ front-end for the LLVM compiler. You can get and build the source today.
On 08/11/2016 11:06 PM, Benutzer42 wrote:
>
> Because of the quote
>
>> The goal of the Clang project is to create a new C, C++, Objective C
>> andObjective C++ front-end for the LLVM compiler. You can get and
>> build the source today.
Fair enough, but keep in mind that most packagers will go and get a
description from the project’s homepage and just use it verbatim because,
well, that’s the description of the project from the original authors.
Packagers are often just packagers, not contributors or developers. As a
result, this may be a bit confusing.
A better indication is the type of package (from your first post, the last
column labeled ‘Type’). If it’s source, it’ll indicate as much with
‘srcpackage’ instead of ‘package’.
–
Good luck.
If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
show your appreciation and click on the star below…