[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] Don't generate lldb inline test Makefiles if Makefile already exists.

Zachary Turner zturner at google.com
Thu Dec 18 10:31:18 PST 2014

Yea, and that's how the patch is implemented now.  But I think what Greg is
saying is that he thought it should check for an existing Makefile first.
If it exists, make a copy of it, then generate the makefile, then after
everything is done restore the old Makefile.  Do you think that's
important?  You wrote most of the lldbinline stuff it looks like, so
ultimately if you're ok with it then I am too, but just want to make sure
we're all on the same page.

On Thu Dec 18 2014 at 10:28:43 AM Sean Callanan <scallanan at apple.com> wrote:

> I think it’d be nice not to delete the Makefile… it can be useful for
> reproducing tests if they fail, removing one reason for manually checking
> in Makefiles.
> I think, though, that CleanMakefile() should stay in but have an empty
> implementation, so that someone who doesn’t want the Makefiles sticking
> around can set an environment variable to delete them (You don’t have to
> actually implement that part, I can do it later, but I’d rather have
> CleanMakefile() around so I know where to do it.)
> Sean
> > On Dec 15, 2014, at 11:33 AM, Greg Clayton <clayborg at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Shouldn't the fact that the make file exists be stored in a class
> variable and then the class will still call CleanMakefile() if the make
> file didn't exist?
> >
> >
> > http://reviews.llvm.org/D6664
> >
> >  http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > lldb-commits mailing list
> > lldb-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/attachments/20141218/5fe7e881/attachment.html>

More information about the lldb-commits mailing list