[lldb-dev] test results look typical?

Tue Aug 25 09:48:15 PDT 2015

In theory the test should be skipped when you are using gcc (cc is an alias
for it) but we detect the type of the compiler based on the executable name
and in case of cc we don't recognize that it is a gcc, so we don't skip the
test.

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 5:45 PM Chaoren Lin via lldb-dev <
lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> You're using CC="/usr/bin/cc". It needs to be clang for USE_LIBCPP to do
> anything. :/
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Here are a couple of the failures that came up (the log output from the
>> full dosep.py run).
>>
>> Let me know if that is not sufficient!
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 9:14 AM, Pavel Labath <labath at google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> There's no need to do anything fancy (yet :) ). For initial diagnosis
>>> the output of `./dotest.py $your_usual_options -p SomeLibcxxTest.py
>>> -t` should suffice.
>>>
>>> pl
>>>
>>> On 25 August 2015 at 16:45, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Thanks, Pavel!  I'll dig that up and get back.
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Pavel Labath <labath at google.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> There is no separate option, it should just work. :)
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm betting you are still missing some package there (we should
>>> >> document the prerequisites better). Could you send the error message
>>> >> you are getting so we can have a look.
>>> >>
>>> >> cheers,
>>> >> pl
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On 25 August 2015 at 16:20, Todd Fiala via lldb-dev
>>> >> <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Chaoren Lin <chaorenl at google.com>
>>> >> >> wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> The TestDataFormatterLibcc* tests require libc++-dev:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> $ sudo apt-get install libc++-dev
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Ah okay, so we are working with libc++ on Ubuntu, that's good to
>>> hear.
>>> >> >> Pre-14.04 I gave up on it.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Will cmake automatically choose libc++ if it is present?  Or do I
>>> need
>>> >> >> to
>>> >> >> pass something to cmake to use libc++?
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Hmm it appears I need to do more than just install libc++-dev.  I
>>> did a
>>> >> > clean build with that installed, then ran the tests, and I still
>>> have
>>> >> > the
>>> >> > Libcxc/Libcxx tests failing.  Is there some flag expected, either to
>>> >> > pass
>>> >> > along for the compile options to dotest.py to override/specify
>>> which c++
>>> >> > lib
>>> >> > it is using?
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Thanks, Chaoren!
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> -Todd
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Todd Fiala via lldb-dev
>>> >> >>> <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Zachary Turner <
>>> zturner at google.com>
>>> >> >>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> Can't comment on the failures for Linux, but I don't think we
>>> have a
>>> >> >>>>> good handle on the unexpected successes.  I only added that
>>> >> >>>>> information to
>>> >> >>>>> the output about a week ago, before that unexpected successes
>>> were
>>> >> >>>>> actually
>>> >> >>>>> going unnoticed.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> Okay, thanks Zachary.   A while back we had some flapping tests
>>> that
>>> >> >>>> would oscillate between unexpected success and failure on Linux.
>>> >> >>>> Some of
>>> >> >>>> those might still be in that state but maybe (!) are fixed.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> Anyone on the Linux end who happens to know if the fails in
>>> >> >>>> particular
>>> >> >>>> look normal, that'd be good to know.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> Thanks!
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> It's likely that someone could just go in there and remove the
>>> XFAIL
>>> >> >>>>> from those tests.
>>> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >>>>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:37 PM Todd Fiala via lldb-dev
>>> >> >>>>> <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> Hi all,
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> I'm just trying to get a handle on current lldb test failures
>>> >> >>>>>> across
>>> >> >>>>>> different platforms.
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> On Linux on non-virtualized hardware, I currently see the
>>> failures
>>> >> >>>>>> below on Ubuntu 14.04.2 using a setup like this:
>>> >> >>>>>> * stock linker (ld.bfd),
>>> >> >>>>>> * g++ 4.9.2
>>> >> >>>>>> * cmake
>>> >> >>>>>> * ninja
>>> >> >>>>>> * libstdc++
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> ninja check-lldb output:
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> Ran 394 test suites (15 failed) (3.807107%)
>>> >> >>>>>> Ran 474 test cases (17 failed) (3.586498%)
>>> >> >>>>>> Failing Tests (15)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestCPPThis.py (Linux rad
>>> 3.13.0-57-generic
>>> >> >>>>>> #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibccIterator.py (Linux
>>> rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibccMap.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibccMultiMap.py (Linux
>>> rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibcxxMultiSet.py
>>> (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibcxxSet.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibcxxString.py (Linux
>>> rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterSkipSummary.py (Linux
>>> rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterUnordered.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiGdbSetShowPrint.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestRegisterVariables.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestStaticVariables.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestStepNoDebug.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic
>>> >> >>>>>> #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestTypedefArray.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic
>>> >> >>>>>> #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestVectorTypesFormatting.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> Unexpected Successes (10)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestBatchMode.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestEvents.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestExitDuringStep.py
>>> (Linux
>>> >> >>>>>> rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestFdLeak.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestInferiorAssert.py
>>> (Linux
>>> >> >>>>>> rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiGdbSetShow.py (Linux
>>> rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiInterpreterExec.py
>>> (Linux
>>> >> >>>>>> rad 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC
>>> 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiSyntax.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestRaise.py (Linux rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestStubSetSID.py (Linux
>>> rad
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.13.0-57-generic #95-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jun 19 09:28:15 UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> ninja: build stopped: subcommand failed.
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> On a similar setup, although bumped up to Ubuntu 14.04.3 and
>>> now on
>>> >> >>>>>> a
>>> >> >>>>>> VMWare VM, everything else the same, I see a similar report
>>> from
>>> >> >>>>>> 'ninja
>>> >> >>>>>> check-lldb':
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> Ran 394 test suites (17 failed) (4.314721%)
>>> >> >>>>>> Ran 474 test cases (19 failed) (4.008439%)
>>> >> >>>>>> Failing Tests (17)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestAttachResume.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestCPPThis.py (Linux lldb
>>> 3.19.0-26-generic
>>> >> >>>>>> #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64
>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibccIterator.py (Linux
>>> lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibccMap.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibccMultiMap.py (Linux
>>> lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibcxxMultiSet.py (Linux
>>> >> >>>>>> lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibcxxSet.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterLibcxxString.py (Linux
>>> lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterSkipSummary.py (Linux
>>> lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterUnordered.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiGdbSetShowPrint.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestRegisterVariables.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestStaticVariables.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestStepNoDebug.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic
>>> >> >>>>>> #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17 UTC 2015 x86_64
>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestStepOverWatchpoint.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestTypedefArray.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestVectorTypesFormatting.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> Unexpected Successes (11)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestBatchMode.py (Linux
>>> lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestEvents.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestExitDuringStep.py
>>> (Linux
>>> >> >>>>>> lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestFdLeak.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestInferiorAssert.py
>>> (Linux
>>> >> >>>>>> lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiGdbSetShow.py (Linux
>>> lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiInterpreterExec.py
>>> (Linux
>>> >> >>>>>> lldb 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12
>>> 14:09:17
>>> >> >>>>>> UTC 2015
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestMiSyntax.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestRaise.py (Linux lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) :: TestStubSetSID.py (Linux
>>> lldb
>>> >> >>>>>> 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12 14:09:17
>>> UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64
>>> >> >>>>>> x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> UNEXPECTED SUCCESS: LLDB (suite) ::
>>> TestWatchedVarHitWhenInScope.py
>>> >> >>>>>> (Linux lldb 3.19.0-26-generic #28~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 12
>>> >> >>>>>> 14:09:17 UTC
>>> >> >>>>>> 2015 x86_64 x86_64)
>>> >> >>>>>> ninja: build stopped: subcommand failed.
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> Do these more or less match the current state of affairs for
>>> Linux
>>> >> >>>>>> tests?  If not, are there any suggestions on best practices for
>>> >> >>>>>> upgrades?  A
>>> >> >>>>>> while back I had tried things like clang and libc++ but I had
>>> >> >>>>>> arrived at the
>>> >> >>>>>> above setup (albeit typically with the gold linker) simply due
>>> to
>>> >> >>>>>> what
>>> >> >>>>>> worked, what was easy to debug and what built fast.
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> Thanks for any confirmation on that!
>>> >> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>>>>> --
>>> >> >>>>>> -Todd
>>> >> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >> >>>>>> lldb-dev mailing list
>>> >> >>>>>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>> >> >>>>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> --
>>> >> >>>> -Todd
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >> >>>> lldb-dev mailing list
>>> >> >>>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>> >> >>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >> -Todd
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > -Todd
>>> >> >
>>> >> > _______________________________________________
>>> >> > lldb-dev mailing list
>>> >> > lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>> >> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
>>> >> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > -Todd
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -Todd
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list
> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20150825/eb7a6dd9/attachment-0001.html>