[lldb-dev] test results look typical?

Tue Aug 25 13:56:45 PDT 2015

So specifying CC=/usr/bin/gcc CXX=/usr/bin/g++ cmake -GNinja ...

did the trick for getting rid of the libc++ issues.  I think I may try to
see if we can get those tests to make a run-time check to see if the
inferior is linked against libc++, and if not, to skip it.  We can have
lldb do it by looking at the image list.  Sound reasonable?  That seems
more fool-proof than guessing based on the compiler.

An alternative I considered and probably also might be valid to do anyway
for cases where we look at the compiler binary is to fully resolve symbolic
links before making decisions based on the binary.

Thoughts?

Separately, with the tests correctly seeing gcc now, I am down to the
following errors:

Ran 394 test suites (5 failed) (1.269036%)
Ran 451 test cases (5 failed) (1.108647%)
Failing Tests (5)
FAIL: 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)
FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestNumThreads.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) :: 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) :: TestThreadExit.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 (10)
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) :: 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)

Some of those failures look like old friends that were failing a year ago.
Can anybody tell me anything about those failures on Linux?  Are they being
looked at?  Any hunches at to what is wrong?

Thanks!

-Todd

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:

> Okay.
>
> So the culprit then is that I'm using:
> cmake -GNinja ../llvm
>
> with one extra flag for build type.  And cmake is then just choosing
> /usr/bin/cc.
>
> We could improve this by having the compiler symbolic links fully resolved:
> /usr/bin/cc -> /etc/alternatives/cc -> /usr/bin/gcc, which would have then
> caught that it doesn't support libc++.
>
> Couldn't we use gcc with libc++?  (i.e. is it sufficient to assume we
> don't have libc++ if we're using gcc?)  I have never tried that combo but I
> don't know that it is impossible.  (After all, I just added libc++-dev to
> the system, which presumably I can link against).
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Tamas Berghammer <tberghammer at google.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> -Todd
>

-- 
-Todd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20150825/a8d95fd9/attachment-0001.html>