Hi, Pavel!
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 3:04 AM, Pavel Labath wrote:
> Hi Eugene,
>
> my thoughts on this are inline.
>
> At which stage does the build now fail for you (after applying the
> fixes above)?
Build failed at very beginning:
source/lldb.cpp:19:10: fatal error: 'clang/Basic/Version.h' fil
I am fine with adding new key/value pairs to each memory region so feel free to
extend as needed as long as any missing keys ("memory_type == stack" for
example) default to something sensible. Then each process plug-in can do what
it can do and the process plug-ins will fill in as much info as p
We just haven't gotten to it yet. If you implement this, please do it like we
do the breakpoints.
Greg Clayton
> On May 13, 2016, at 11:34 AM, Daniel Noland via lldb-dev
> wrote:
>
> Please correct me if I have missed something critical here, but the C++
> SB API does not seem to provide a wa
Regular expression commands are not multi-line commands. So your approach of
doing:
(lldb) command regex jspatch 's/(.+)/p (id)[JPEngine evaluateScript:@"%1"]/'
won't work with:
jspatch 'var a = 10
var b = 20
a = a + b'
because this will get executed as:
(lldb) jspatch 'var a = 10
(lldb) var
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27782
Bug ID: 27782
Summary: Go tests failing on OS X
Product: lldb
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: MacOS X
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P
> On May 13, 2016, at 9:13 AM, Zachary Turner wrote:
>
> On Intel processors, the best way to do this is probably going to be to walk
> the page directory (see Intel processor manuals). Assuming someone
> implements this command in lldb, I hope it can be done in such a way as to
> allow diff
Provided it builds everywhere and you are planning on continuing to work on it,
I see no problems with putting this into the lldb tree. If there are any parts
that touch common code, you might want to submit those first (in appropriate
chunks) so that the people who are going to review it can se
Apologies for the confusion, I don't mean either of those.
This was working on a debug tool for the IBM JVM. When we added the
MiniDumpWithFullMemoryInfo to our calls to MiniDumpWriteDump we found it
inserted blank ranges to keep the regions in the MINIDUMP_MEMORY_INFO_LIST
structure contiguou
Apologies, I don't mean either of those.
This was working on a debug tool for the IBM JVM. When we added the MiniDumpWithFullMemoryInfo to our calls to MiniDumpWriteDump we found it inserted blank ranges to keep the regions in the MINIDUMP_MEMORY_INFO_LIST structure contiguous. I checked a dump j
Hi Eugene,
my thoughts on this are inline.
On 14 May 2016 at 01:46, Eugene Zelenko via lldb-dev
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I tried to build standalone LLDB after r269332 change in
> LLDBStandalone.cmake and encountered next problems:
>
> It implies that LLVM and Clang were built separately, but they could
10 matches
Mail list logo
