aprantl added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D42281#990296, @labath wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D42281#989793, @aprantl wrote: > > > I am now working on building each test variant (dwarf,dwo,dsym,...) in its > > own build directory so they can run in parallel and we can get rid of the > > lockfile. > > > Are you planning to merge that into this patch? I am hoping that can be done > in a separate pass, once dust settles down from landing this batch. > > I think this is in a pretty good shape now, and we should land it soon. The > only thing i'd like to wait for is confirmation that this runs on windows > (i.e. does not run into any fundamental make limitations on that platform). > I'm going to see if I can get around to that today. Sure that makes total sense. "Smaller" patches are always better. I'm mostly waiting for someone to greenlight Windows now. ================ Comment at: source/Plugins/ObjectFile/Mach-O/ObjectFileMachO.cpp:5139-5142 - if (file_spec.Exists() && files.AppendIfUnique(file_spec)) { + if (file_spec.Exists() && files.AppendIfUnique(file_spec)) count++; - break; - } ---------------- labath wrote: > I think it makes sense to separate the single change in actual code from the > gigantuous code refactor. Oh right. This is an actual bug that I found because my refactoring of makefiles happened to change the relative order of dylibs in the Mach-O headers. https://reviews.llvm.org/D42281 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
