[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D26188: [RFC] Solve linking inconsistency, proposal one

[Pavel Labath via lldb-commits]

See <https://reviews.llvm.org/D26093>.

Basically the problem is that we are pulling in llvm symbols twice
into lldb-mi (once in liblldb, and once in lldb-mi proper). This was
causing runtime errors if we did not have the "linker firewall" in
place. I am proposing to either make sure things build without the
firewall, or to officially require it.

pl

On 1 November 2016 at 15:29, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
> Can I have some background? What is the linking problem?
>
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 8:16 AM Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> tfiala added a comment.
>>
>> I'll let Greg comment on the public ABI expansion (i.e. including llvm of
>> a specific version, which may differ from LLDB.framework clients that
>> contain different versions of LLVM).  My guess is this is not going to work
>> for us, since we have long-lived frameworks shipped with Xcode that get used
>> by clients where we cannot assume what they are or are not using.  However,
>> we could address that by adding the reverse flag, which would be "don't
>> export LLVM", and have that be exported by default.
>>
>> The bit I care about is the "modulo backtrace(3)..." part.  This change is
>> taking away my ability to use log-based stacktraces on Linux if I read it
>> right.  How were you envisioning I do that with this change?
>>
>>
>> https://reviews.llvm.org/D26188
>>
>>
>>
>