Just commented out that shm_open/unlink portion, yes yes I know its bad. But spawn.h + posix_spawn.c is absolutely needed for lldb, and it will need heavy commentary from the header guys just like the recent fenv.h changes. Otherwise, the alternative is ugly and a patch set for lldb which is more of a pain to maintain in years ahead.
Its much easier to see if FreeBSD can work as close to unmodified before I revisit this issue back on tech@ to see how to bring initial support lldb in OpenBSD. Will have gained some more experience then. On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Matthew Dempsky <matt...@dempsky.org> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Matthew Dempsky <matt...@dempsky.org> wrote: >> We do have shmat(2) and shmdt(2). Can't you just use >> open(2)/unlink(2) instead of shm_open()/shm_unlink()? > > Bah, ignore that.
