royitaqi wrote: > > It's not clear if there are legitimate production use cases where the > > Mach-O files don't have said load commands. If there is, then what is their > > expected object format? Without this patch, they are currently ELF. With > > this patch, they will become MachO > > At the point in the code where you made your change we already assume that we > have a Mach-O file because we are passing in and examining the header. I > think it makes sense to set the triple to be Mach-O here. > > Even if we have Mach-O files in the wild that don't have the version load > commands, it seems those still must be treated as Mach-O files to make any > sense of them.
I agree. In a sense, this patch is fixing this bug for those Mach-O files. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142704 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
