labath accepted this revision.
labath added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.

lgtm. Thanks for the patience.



================
Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/minidump/ProcessMinidump.cpp:401
+      basename_module_spec.GetUUID().Clear();
+      basename_module_spec.GetFileSpec().GetDirectory().Clear();
+      module_sp = GetTarget().GetSharedModule(basename_module_spec, &error);
----------------
clayborg wrote:
> labath wrote:
> > What will happen if you just delete this line? Based on my experiments, I 
> > believe we should still end up looking through the exec-search-paths list. 
> > However, the test does not seem to be modifying this setting, so it's not 
> > clear to me how it is even finding the binary in the first place. What's 
> > the mechanism you're relying on for the lookup in the test?
> It doesn't work without clearing the fullpath here and I didn't want to 
> modify the current behavior of the exec search paths in here just in case it 
> would affect others that were depending on a certain behavior.
Ok, I don't think we have to block on that, but I'd still like to understand 
how the files are found in the first place. Right now, I don't understand it 
because:
a) they are not in exec-search-path
b) (I think) they are not in CWD
So the fact that they are found may be accidental and prone to breakage.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D60001/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D60001



_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to