tfiala abandoned this revision. tfiala added a comment. I've fixed: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=25019
I think for now I am not interested in trying to tackle the intent of this change as it unduly complicates the timeout detection logic. I am okay with saying: "If you run a process http://reviews.llvm.org/P1, and that process creates child processes C1..CN, and shares the stdout/stderr file handles from http://reviews.llvm.org/P1 to C1..CN, and if http://reviews.llvm.org/P1 exits, we don't detect the exit until all stdout/stderr handles shared with C1..CN are closed." That's just a bad test if it is leaving children around. It will time out. Addressing that in Python should be possible, as I was working towards here, but I don't see that as being worthwhile. If we didn't time out (as was the case prior to an earlier fix yesterday), that would be an issue. But that's no longer the case. http://reviews.llvm.org/D13362 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
