[lldb-dev] test results look typical?

Tue Aug 25 17:45:57 PDT 2015

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Chaoren,
>
> Right you are, I am using a VMWare VM.  Usually when I have issues with
> VMs, it is because I'm not using VMWare, so this is a change!
>
>
And I am happy to report I get *no* errors when building with clang-3.6 +
ld.gold + Debug on real iron.

Thanks for the help, everyone!

-Todd

> Do you have a reference to a VMWare bug on this?  That would be great to
> follow up with them on.
>
> In the absence of that, I wonder if we can detect that is the runtime
> environment and perhaps skip that test on VMWare VMs.  I'm pretty sure we
> can detect that we're running in a VM if (at least) the guest tools are
> installed.  I'll look into that.
>
> -Todd
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Chaoren Lin <chaorenl at google.com> wrote:
>
>> Sorry, "kernel" bug is probably the wrong word. It's a problem specific
>> to WMware.
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Chaoren Lin <chaorenl at google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Are you running VMware by any chance? TestStepOverWatchpoint fails on
>>> VMware because of a kernel bug.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> One more data point:
>>>>
>>>> Building/testing on Ubuntu 14.04.3 built with clang-3.6 and the ld.gold
>>>> linker yielded the following test results, bringing me down to a single
>>>> failure (and was 1.6x faster than a Debug build with gcc-4.9 and ld.bfd, 12
>>>> GB RAM and 6 cores allocated):
>>>>
>>>> Failing Tests (1)
>>>> 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)
>>>>
>>>> Unexpected Successes (12)
>>>> 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) :: TestConstVariables.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)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm not yet sure if that's stable, but it's what I'm seeing on my VM.
>>>>
>>>> -Todd
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> -Todd
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> -Todd
>

-- 
-Todd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20150825/86f8f075/attachment-0001.html>