aprantl added a comment.
> Removal of functionality - The lit test suite no longer respects
> LLDB_TEST_C_COMPILER and LLDB_TEST_CXX_COMPILER. This means there is no more
> support for gcc, but nobody was using this anyway (note: The functionality is
> still there for the dotest suite, just not
stella.stamenova added a comment.
We should also remove LLDB_TEST_C_COMPILER and LLDB_TEST_CXX_COMPILER from the
cmake files along with this change, otherwise, people will still expect them to
work.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567
___
lldb-commits
aprantl added a comment.
There is also this bot that does something similar with even more compilers,
including gcc:
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lldb-x86_64-ubuntu-14.04-cmake/builds/31242
Do you happen to know who maintains it?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567
___
aprantl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1299989, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> We should also remove LLDB_TEST_C_COMPILER and LLDB_TEST_CXX_COMPILER from
> the cmake files along with this change, otherwise, people will still expect
> them to work.
That would not be a good ide
stella.stamenova added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#122, @aprantl wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1299989, @stella.stamenova wrote:
>
> > We should also remove LLDB_TEST_C_COMPILER and LLDB_TEST_CXX_COMPILER from
> > the cmake files along with this change, otherw
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1299982, @aprantl wrote:
> > Removal of functionality - The lit test suite no longer respects
> > LLDB_TEST_C_COMPILER and LLDB_TEST_CXX_COMPILER. This means there is no
> > more support for gcc, but nobody was using this anyway (note:
aprantl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#123, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#122, @aprantl wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1299989, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> >
> > > We should also remove LLDB_TEST_C_COMPILER and LLDB_TEST
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#123, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#122, @aprantl wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1299989, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> >
> > > We should also remove LLDB_TEST_C_COMPILER and LLDB_TEST
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#128, @aprantl wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#123, @stella.stamenova wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#122, @aprantl wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1299989, @stella.stamenova wro
labath added inline comments.
Comment at: tools/debugserver/source/CMakeLists.txt:101
+option(LLDB_NO_DEBUGSERVER "Delete debugserver after building it, and don't
try to codesign it" OFF)
+option(LLDB_USE_SYSTEM_DEBUGSERVER "Neither build nor codesign debugserver.
Use the syste
aprantl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#127, @zturner wrote:
> It's possible I didn't make this part clear enough. I didn't mean that
> nobody is using `LLDB_TEST_C_COMPILER`, I meant that nobody is using it **in
> order to compile inferiors with gcc**. There is also a
aprantl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#130, @zturner wrote:
> http://green.lab.llvm.org/green/view/LLDB/job/lldb-cmake-clang-5.0.2/
>
> What do I need to click on to get the equivalent of this:
> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/lldb-x86_64-ubuntu-14.04-cmake/builds/312
stella.stamenova added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#129, @zturner wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#123, @stella.stamenova wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#122, @aprantl wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1299989, @stella.stam
stella.stamenova added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300030, @aprantl wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#130, @zturner wrote:
>
> > http://green.lab.llvm.org/green/view/LLDB/job/lldb-cmake-clang-5.0.2/
> >
> > What do I need to click on to get the equivalent of this:
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300028, @aprantl wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#127, @zturner wrote:
>
> > It's possible I didn't make this part clear enough. I didn't mean that
> > nobody is using `LLDB_TEST_C_COMPILER`, I meant that nobody is usin
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300031, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300030, @aprantl wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#130, @zturner wrote:
> >
> > > http://green.lab.llvm.org/green/view/LLDB/job/lldb-cmake-clang-5.
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300029, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#129, @zturner wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#123, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#122, @aprantl wro
aprantl added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300035, @zturner wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300028, @aprantl wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#127, @zturner wrote:
> >
> > > It's possible I didn't make this part clear enough. I didn't mean that
>
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300029, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#129, @zturner wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#123, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#122, @aprantl wro
stella.stamenova added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300064, @zturner wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300029, @stella.stamenova wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#129, @zturner wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#123, @stella.stam
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300083, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300064, @zturner wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300029, @stella.stamenova wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#129, @zturner wro
JDevlieghere added a comment.
Personally I don't think we should differentiate between the lit and dotest
suite when it comes to using a custom compiler. The separation between the two
suits is mostly the result of what framework is easier to write your test is
(or which one you're more familia
sgraenitz updated this revision to Diff 174253.
sgraenitz marked an inline comment as not done.
sgraenitz edited the summary of this revision.
sgraenitz added a comment.
Handle reconfigurations correctly; fix configuration messages; add note for
generator expressions
https://reviews.llvm.org/D5
Author: adrian
Date: Thu Nov 15 11:15:03 2018
New Revision: 346981
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=346981&view=rev
Log:
Port the Darwin universal binary testcase to x86_64.
Xcode 10 doesn't ship with an i386 SDK any more. This patch ports the
testcase from an i386/x86_64 -> x86_64/x8
sgraenitz updated this revision to Diff 174254.
sgraenitz added a comment.
Improve description for options LLDB_NO_DEBUGSERVER and
LLDB_USE_SYSTEM_DEBUGSERVER
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54476
Files:
test/CMakeLists.txt
tools/debugserver/CMakeLists.txt
tools/debugserver/source/CMakeLists.t
sgraenitz added a comment.
Last revision changed a lot, but I think support for reconfigurations is worth
it.
The current state would be acceptable from my side now -- if I didn't miss
anything! :-)
Comment at: tools/debugserver/source/CMakeLists.txt:101
+option(LLDB_NO_DEBUG
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rLLDB346988: Add a check whether or not a str is utf8 prior to
emplacing (authored by lanza, committed by ).
Herald added subscribers: lldb-commits, abidh.
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.or
Author: jmolenda
Date: Thu Nov 15 12:28:55 2018
New Revision: 346991
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=346991&view=rev
Log:
A unit test file moved.
Modified:
lldb/trunk/lldb.xcodeproj/project.pbxproj
Modified: lldb/trunk/lldb.xcodeproj/project.pbxproj
URL:
http://llvm.org/viewvc/
stella.stamenova added a comment.
> That said, in the interest of not changing too much all at once, it still
> seems like something that's perhaps better done in a future patch. WDYT?
I actually think it would be better now - the people who use the properties for
compile the lit tests will
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rLLDB346993: Force SHELL to be cmd.exe on Windows for the test
suite (authored by lanza, committed by ).
Herald added a subscriber: lldb-commits.
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54510?v
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rLLDB346994: Implement basic DidAttach and DidLaunch for
DynamicLoaderWindowsDYLD (authored by lanza, committed by ).
Herald added subscribers: lldb-commits, abidh.
Changed prior to commit:
https://review
Hui added inline comments.
Comment at:
source/Plugins/DynamicLoader/Windows-DYLD/DynamicLoaderWindowsDYLD.cpp:75
+
+void DynamicLoaderWindowsDYLD::DidLaunch() {
+ Log *log(GetLogIfAnyCategoriesSet(LIBLLDB_LOG_DYNAMIC_LOADER));
I think DynamicLoaderWindowsDYLD::
Author: zturner
Date: Thu Nov 15 14:03:49 2018
New Revision: 346999
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=346999&view=rev
Log:
Fix compilation failure in unit tests on Windows.
Modified:
lldb/trunk/unittests/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteTestUtils.cpp
Modified: lldb/trunk/unittests/Proc
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300183, @JDevlieghere wrote:
> Personally I don't think we should differentiate between the lit and dotest
> suite when it comes to using a custom compiler. The separation between the
> two suits is mostly the result of what framework
aprantl created this revision.
aprantl added reviewers: JDevlieghere, davide, jingham, vsk.
Just to be safe, up until now each test used its own Clang module
cache directory. Since the compiler within one testsuite doesn't
change it is just as safe to share a clang module directory inside the
LLDB
aprantl created this revision.
aprantl added reviewers: JDevlieghere, davide, jingham, vsk.
aprantl added a dependency: D54601: Makefile.rules: Use a shared clang module
cache directory..
This saves about 3 redundant gigabytes from the Objective-C test build
directories. Tests that must do unsavo
JDevlieghere accepted this revision.
JDevlieghere added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54601
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/
JDevlieghere accepted this revision.
JDevlieghere added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54602
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/
JDevlieghere accepted this revision.
JDevlieghere added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Thanks for working on this, Stefan. This LGTM.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54476
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.
JDevlieghere added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300459, @zturner wrote:
> I'm not sure how hard it would be.
>
> One problem is that dotest supports not just choosing a compiler, but
> choosing multiple compilers, as well as multiple architectures and it runs
> the test suite
aprantl updated this revision to Diff 174311.
aprantl added a comment.
Small bugfix + an error message that would have caught it.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54601
Files:
lit/lit.cfg.py
packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/make/Makefile.rules
Index: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/make/Makefile.ru
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300641, @JDevlieghere wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54567#1300459, @zturner wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure how hard it would be.
> >
> > One problem is that dotest supports not just choosing a compiler, but
> > choosing multiple com
Author: zturner
Date: Thu Nov 15 18:42:32 2018
New Revision: 347018
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=347018&view=rev
Log:
[NativePDB] Rewrite the PdbSymUid to use our own custom namespacing scheme.
Originally we created our 64-bit UID scheme by using the first byte as
sort of a "tag"
Author: zturner
Date: Thu Nov 15 19:16:27 2018
New Revision: 347020
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=347020&view=rev
Log:
Don't use uniform initialization syntax.
Modified:
lldb/trunk/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/NativePDB/PdbIndex.cpp
lldb/trunk/source/Plugins/SymbolFile/NativeP
JDevlieghere created this revision.
JDevlieghere added reviewers: davide, shafik, friss, jingham.
JDevlieghere added a project: LLDB.
Herald added subscribers: abidh, mgorny.
When I landed the initial reproducer framework I knew there were some things
that needed improvement. Rather than bundling
JDevlieghere created this revision.
Herald added a subscriber: mgorny.
JDevlieghere added a subscriber: labath.
This patch is WIP and meant to showcase how the reproducer and VFS will
interact.
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54617
Files:
include/lldb/Host/FileSystem.h
JDevlieghere added a comment.
- Initialization of the FS needs to happen in the driver.
- All file access has to go through the new FileSystem.
- Needs tests.
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54617
___
lldb-commits mailing list
ll
davide accepted this revision.
davide added a comment.
lgtm
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54602
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
48 matches
Mail list logo