So one thing I'm still unclear about, is exactly when I will receive a launch request through the Process plugin versus when I will receive the request directly through the Host without first going through the Process plugin.
On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Zachary Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks. So what I take away from this is that they basically do the same > thing, and Process::DoLaunch() can simply call Host::LaunchProcess. > > > On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Jean-Daniel Dupas <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Here is a discussion that may give you some answers: >> >> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.debugging.lldb.devel/2805 >> >> For the record, I wrote a process plugin, and end-up not having to >> implements the Process:DoLaunch method at all. >> On OS X, all processes are launched by the platform which then call >> DoAttach. So the Process::DoLaunch code path is never use. >> >> Le 9 août 2014 à 02:14, Zachary Turner <[email protected]> a écrit : >> >> > Why are there different code paths for launching a process through >> these two methods? Shouldn't there just be one codepath for launching a >> process? >> > >> > I've implemented a very primitive process launch for Windows in >> ProcessPluginWindows::DoLaunch, but now I'm running into cases where tests >> are failing because Host::LaunchProcess isn't implemented yet on Windows. >> What do I need to understand about the differences between these two >> codepaths to make sure I implement the two correctly? And is there perhaps >> a way to refactor some of this code so that all of the process-spawning >> code lives in the same place, and the launch args are flexible enough to >> support all of the different use cases? >> > _______________________________________________ >> > lldb-dev mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev >> >> >
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
