> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Ingham
> Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2020 5:51 PM
> To: David Blaikie
> ; David Blaikie
> via Phabricator
> Cc: Robinson, Paul ; r...@google.com;
> echri...@gmail.com; sontuan.vu...@gmail.com; mcros...@codeaurora.org;
> nikola.te...@syrmia.com; lldb-comm
Hi Davide,
I reread the review, and I see I was confused by two things:
(1) the name of the test is static_scope.s even though what it's testing is the
scope of a var with a const_value, nothing to do with `static`;
(2) there's this comment in the review: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77698#1973122
> -Original Message-
> From: lldb-commits On Behalf Of
> Davide Italiano via lldb-commits
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2020 4:32 PM
> To: lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
> Subject: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] 1fae85a - [DWARF] Add instructions to
> regenerate this test, if needed.
>
>
> Author: D
> -Original Message-
> From: Pavel Labath [mailto:lab...@google.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2017 4:09 AM
> To: Jason Molenda
> Cc: lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org; Robinson, Paul
> Subject: Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r319653 - Makefile.rules: compile all
> tests with -fno-limit-debug-in
FTR, the size of the compile-unit header also changed in DWARF version 5,
independent of the 32/64 format.
On a different topic, I had thought there was a goal of nuking lldb's copy of
the DWARFxxx headers and converting to use LLVM's? Did I imagine this? If I
do remember that correctly, fidd
IANA lldb developer, but I should think lldb would want to understand a
DWARF 4 .debug_frame section. (And it didn't change in DWARF 5, either!)
--paulr
> -Original Message-
> From: lldb-commits [mailto:lldb-commits-boun...@lists.llvm.org] On Behalf
> Of Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
> S
Recently I started seeing a build error from a tree that has lldb in it;
I don't know whether the problem is my configuration, or Ubuntu, or gcc,
or what, but gcc complains that it can't convert 'int' to 'sigset_t' on
the return statement.
This naïve one-liner fixes it, although I don't know any
> > I think we could emulate any pre-commit hook we like via GitHub
> > WebHooks by having two repositories: llvm and llvm-staging (say).
> >
> > People push to llvm-staging, which notifies some LLVM server we own.
> > That does basic sanity checks and pushes to llvm proper if passed.
>
> I think
