> FWIW, this just bit me when compiling the Crack language, which was looking for llvm-config, not llvm-config-3.2.
Yes, Xorg is the same, the build script looks for llvm-config and fails otherwise.
> no, alternatives are not used to hide ABI or API changes. You should explicitly specify the tool you want to use.
> Users and upstream want a specific version of LLVM.
I don't see how llvm is different to automake, or cc/c++, or java, which all support update-alternatives?
> FWIW, this just bit me when compiling the Crack language, which was looking for llvm-config, not llvm-config-3.2.
Yes, Xorg is the same, the build script looks for llvm-config and fails otherwise.
> no, alternatives are not used to hide ABI or API changes. You should explicitly specify the tool you want to use.
> Users and upstream want a specific version of LLVM.
I don't see how llvm is different to automake, or cc/c++, or java, which all support update- alternatives?