zturner added a comment. In D55230#1317320 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55230#1317320>, @clayborg wrote:
> What is the reason we aren't using cmake + ninja for this kind of stuff? Or > is it using it under the covers? CMake gives you a nice static configuration for how you want to build your host toolchain, but that doesn't always match up with how you want to build your test inferiors. You might even have a situation where two test inferiors need to be built with different toolchains than each other. I think dotest has a lot of the same issues here, that's why we use the Makefile system over there. Eventually, we will want to be able to decouple the test suite from the local build entirely, so that you could invoke it from the command line similar to how you can currently invoke dotest from the command line. This would allow running the test suite multiple times with different toolchains or settings, which wouldn't be possible if there's a single upfront configuration done at CMake time. It's also nice for test reproducibility to be able to look at a test and see the extact reproducer, e.g. (run this command line to build, then run lldb in this way and it repros). CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D55230/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D55230 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
