Alex Denisov via llvm-dev
2018-Sep-11 14:46 UTC
[llvm-dev] LLVM Releases "broken" link for 5.0.0-ubuntu16.04
Hi folks, I’m doing some automation and wanted to use pre-built binaries for Ubuntu in a script, here is what I’ve found: http://releases.llvm.org/6.0.0/clang+llvm-6.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz http://releases.llvm.org/5.0.0/clang+llvm-5.0.0-linux-x86_64-ubuntu16.04.tar.xz http://releases.llvm.org/4.0.0/clang+llvm-4.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz http://releases.llvm.org/3.9.0/clang+llvm-3.9.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz http://releases.llvm.org/3.8.0/clang+llvm-3.8.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz As you can see link for the version 5.0.0 is not quite of the same form as others. I’m curious, would it be possible to re-upload the same binary next the existing one? Just to make things consistent :) Best regards, Alex. -- AlexDenisov Software Engineer, https://lowlevelbits.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 525 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180911/6e37445c/attachment.sig>
Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev
2018-Sep-13 11:42 UTC
[llvm-dev] LLVM Releases "broken" link for 5.0.0-ubuntu16.04
On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 4:46 PM, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> Hi folks, > > I’m doing some automation and wanted to use pre-built binaries for Ubuntu in a script, here is what I’ve found: > > http://releases.llvm.org/6.0.0/clang+llvm-6.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz > http://releases.llvm.org/5.0.0/clang+llvm-5.0.0-linux-x86_64-ubuntu16.04.tar.xz > http://releases.llvm.org/4.0.0/clang+llvm-4.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz > http://releases.llvm.org/3.9.0/clang+llvm-3.9.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz > http://releases.llvm.org/3.8.0/clang+llvm-3.8.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz > > As you can see link for the version 5.0.0 is not quite of the same form as others. > I’m curious, would it be possible to re-upload the same binary next the existing one?I'd rather not change things with the existing binaries. Note that the filename is also used for the directory name inside the tarball, so we can't just add a symlink or copy the file.