This piece of code is OS X only, it's cons'ing up an AppleScript to run the
process in a new Terminal.app window. So unless Windows has implemented an
AppleScript drivable Terminal.app behind our backs we don't need to work this
problem that hard...
> On Oct 18, 2016, at 4:43 PM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote:
> I don't think you need to go out of your way to account for this, but
> Microsoft recently shipped bash on Windows in a full ubuntu environment. I
> can't check right this second, but I don't think it has sh, only bash. What
> about a fallback? Try bash, if you can't find it try sh. Thoughts?
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 4:39 PM Jim Ingham via lldb-commits
> <email@example.com> wrote:
> I am pretty sure /bin/sh is supposed to be a posix shell. We could probably
> use that as well if we felt that there might be an OS X without /bin/bash.
> But we aren't using any but the most basic properties of the shell along this
> code path. It isn't being done for shell expansion or anything like that,
> So there isn't much point in making it overridable.
> > On Oct 18, 2016, at 4:26 PM, Todd Fiala via lldb-commits
> > <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Actually that's a good point. We can default to bash but add a setting to
> > override. The issue we have to solve is that the current approach fails
> > with non-POSIX shells.
> > -Todd
> >> On Oct 18, 2016, at 4:09 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <jo...@netbsd.org> wrote:
> >> joerg added a comment.
> >> OK, this is OSX specific, but I still think that hardcoding bash is a bad
> >> idea. Does it need anything not in `/bin/sh`?
> >> https://reviews.llvm.org/D25750
> > _______________________________________________
> > lldb-commits mailing list
> > email@example.com
> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
> lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits mailing list