JDevlieghere added a comment.

In D94890#2507241 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D94890#2507241>, @MaskRay wrote:

> In D94890#2505988 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D94890#2505988>, @labath wrote:
>
>> Looks like a nice cleanup. The only part I am not sure of is the part about 
>> removing `$(RM) $(ARCHIVE_OBJECTS)`. Is that necessary?
>> I'm not sure why is that line there, but if I had to guess, I would say it's 
>> to ensure that lldb (on macos) reads debug info from the archive file 
>> instead of the original .o files. If it's not required, it may be better to 
>> leave it in. Otherwise, someone from Apple should say whether that is ok 
>> (testing archives is only really interesting on fruity platforms).
>
> I can add back it under the `ifeq "$(OS)" "Darwin"` guard if Apple folks 
> think it is useful.

It looks like we have only one test on llvm.org (+ one additional test in the 
Swift fork) that's using this. My vote is to just remove this together with the 
`ARCHIVE_C_SOURCES`, `ARCHIVE_CXX_SOURCES`, `ARCHIVE_OBJC_SOURCES` and 
`ARCHIVE_OBJCXX_SOURCES` and inline it in that one test.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D94890/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D94890

_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to