NoQ added a comment. In D89481#2359093 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D89481#2359093>, @sberg wrote:
> Is there a reason why "NoQ accepted this revision." kept this at "Needs > Review" rather than moving it to "This revision is now accepted and ready to > land."? Dunno! I think you should commit this. > Anyway, I added a test now. Hope the use of `REQUIRES: shell` is appropriate > guarding for using `sh` and `basename` (and as such would subsume the `// > FIXME: Actually, "perl". REQUIRES: shell` found in other test files in that > directory using `%scan-build`, or should it better also carry that FIXME > comment for a perl requirement, as scan-build is written in perl?). Yes, this comment is there because scan-build itself is written in perl; scan-build tests would obviously fail without it. But we don't have an actual `REQUIRES: perl` and `REQUIRES: shell` seems to be precise enough. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D89481/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D89481 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
