JDevlieghere added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47539#1117114, @jasonmolenda wrote:
> LGTM. If we added more knowledge specifically about kext bundle layouts, we > could restrict which files we test to see if they are valid binaries - but > we'd need to parse the Info.plist at the top (to get the CFBundleExecutable > name, and look for variations on that prefix) and we'd need to handle > shallow/deep kext bundles. Given how few files are in kext bundles besides > the kexts themselves (a couple of plists), this is code is much simpler than > encoding all that extra specifics about kexts. Thanks Jason! Currently there are no kext test currently. Jason and I had a brief discussion yesterday on how we could do this in the future, but while it is certainly possible (and something I want to do) it's going to be too much work for this small change. Unless anyone has a practical idea for a test I'm going to land this as is, awaiting the aforementioned kext test infrastructure. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47539 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
