It seems xiangzhai has already "cranked up a review" :) (D32787), so
moving the discussion there.
On 3 May 2017 at 09:57, Pavel Labath wrote:
> This doesn't make things any worse, but a better solution would be to
> figure out why cmake has not detected ppoll(2) support, as lldb on
> linux is use
This doesn't make things any worse, but a better solution would be to
figure out why cmake has not detected ppoll(2) support, as lldb on
linux is useless without the signal polling stuff. If your system does
have ppoll, but we're not detecting it, we will have to fix detection
code. On the off chan
