JDevlieghere added a comment. In D129166#3633243 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129166#3633243>, @labath wrote:
> In D129166#3633116 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129166#3633116>, @JDevlieghere > wrote: > >> Thanks for the thoughtful reply Pavel. The remote tests are something we >> care about as well, so I'd like to have a solution for that. What do you >> think about adding a "stdlib" mode to dotest.py which allows you to pick >> between "system libc++", "system libstdc++" and "just built libc++". The >> latter would be hermetic, and the former would match what we do today. > > Well.. I think that specifying some of this explicitly would be great, but I > don't think a choice between a libc++ and libstdc++ makes sense. > > The way I see it, we have three kinds of tests: > > 1. Tests which don't care which library we use. This is the vast majority of > them. The only need it to be there, but the actual test result should not > depend on the library used in any way. For these tests, we can use any > library we like. (except maybe for the gmodules test variant, but I don't > actually know how that one works). I don't think we need to offer a choice > here. Ideally we would be able to just pick the option that works (it may not > be the same option for each config). > 2. Tests which explicitly require libc++. There shouldn't be too many of > these, and ideally these would be limited to tests for the libc++ pretty > printers and such. It doesn't make sense to run these against libstdc++. In > fact, that would be harmful, because it might actually work, but test the > wrong thing. Ideally, we'd give the user the option to choose between the > system libc++, just-built libc++ or a way to specify the arguments needed to > build&run these kinds of executables. > 3. Tests which explicitly require libstdc++. These is the same thing, except > for libstdc++ pretty printers. And that we obviously don't have an in-tree > version of libstdc++. And I don't think we have many people interested in > running tests against libstdc++, so we probably don't have to go overboard on > this one, but it would be nice to be able to keep running the existing tests > against system libstdc++ on systems which have one. Okay, so a binary option to specify the system libc++ or the just-built libc++. The libstd+++ stuff remains unchanged. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D129166/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D129166 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
