Description of problem: clang-5.0.0-1.fc27 provides clang-5.0 and clang++ but not clang++-5.0 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): clang-5.0.0-1.fc27 How reproducible: Every time Steps to Reproduce: 1. run clang++-5.0 Actual results: bash: clang++-5.0: command not found... Expected results: clang++-5.0: error: no input files Additional info: It it inconsistent to provide a C compiler called clang-5.0 but not a C++ compiler called clang++-5.0. Having a versioned name for the compiler is convenient. It can be used to distinguish one compiler from another.
clang-5.0.1-5.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-31b7d5c1db
clang-5.0.1-5.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-31b7d5c1db
Thank you for the fix. It works for me. I'm a bit surprised that clang++-5.0 is a link to clang++ rather than the other way around (clang is a link to clang-5.0). I think the most robust link order would be clang -> clang-5.0 clang++ -> clang++-5.0 clang++-5.0 -> clang-5.0 That's probably not a big deal in the contest of a distro that provides a single clang version. But the upstream would likely do it differently. There is an upstream issue: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28580
(In reply to Pavel Roskin from comment #3) > Thank you for the fix. It works for me. I'm a bit surprised that clang++-5.0 > is a link to clang++ rather than the other way around (clang is a link to > clang-5.0). > > I think the most robust link order would be > > clang -> clang-5.0 > clang++ -> clang++-5.0 > clang++-5.0 -> clang-5.0 > I agree that logically this would make more sense, but implementing it this way in Fedora would require patching the LLVM sources, which I'm hesitant to do for a user convenience feature like this one. Ideally this change would come from upstream.
clang-5.0.1-5.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
pocl-1.1-2.fc28 lldb-6.0.0-3.fc28 clang-6.0.0-5.fc28 llvm-6.0.0-11.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-02c4091319
clang-6.0.0-5.fc28, lldb-6.0.0-3.fc28, llvm-6.0.0-11.fc28, mesa-18.0.0-2.fc28.1, pocl-1.1-2.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-02c4091319
clang-6.0.0-5.fc28 lldb-6.0.0-3.fc28 llvm-6.0.0-11.fc28 mesa-18.0.0-3.fc28 pocl-1.1-2.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-02c4091319
clang-6.0.0-5.fc28, lldb-6.0.0-3.fc28, llvm-6.0.0-11.fc28, mesa-18.0.0-3.fc28, pocl-1.1-2.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-02c4091319
clang-6.0.0-5.fc28, lldb-6.0.0-3.fc28, llvm-6.0.0-11.fc28, mesa-18.0.0-3.fc28, pocl-1.1-2.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.