Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-15 Thread Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
I don't really understand the purpose of the test, but if the purpose of it is to check whether something appears on stdout, then a pexpect test does seem like the right tool for the job. I have tried entering the commands from the test manually, and the required text does *not* appear when using

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-15 Thread Siva Chandra via lldb-commits
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 2:18 AM, Pavel Labath via lldb-commits wrote: > I don't really understand the purpose of the test, but if the purpose > of it is to check whether something appears on stdout, then a pexpect > test does seem like the right tool for the job. > >

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-14 Thread Tamas Berghammer via lldb-commits
I XFAIL-ed the test for Linux to get the build bot green again and filed a bug at https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=26139 On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:18 AM Ying Chen via lldb-commits < lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Please see attached log file. > > Thanks, > Ying > > On Wed, Jan 13,

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-14 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
Wouldn't testing with output redirecxted to a file still test that it is being streamed as it is obtained rather than a big dump at the end? I mean that's what stdout is right? Just a file. If you use a file on the filesystem instead, just check the contents of the file after each operation.

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-14 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
How much time do you think it would take to determine whether or not using the file-based approach would work? Because on the surface it sounds fairly straightforward, and fixing it that way would allow us to not have to xfail this on more platforms for reasons that we don't understand. On Thu,

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-14 Thread Enrico Granata via lldb-commits
The log just shows a timeout is happening in pexpect() - which I don’t have a ready explanation for X-failing for now is the proper recourse. But you might want to debug this at some point, since it’s weird behavior. It looks like the command is not even just silently erroring out - from the

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-14 Thread Jim Ingham via lldb-commits
I worry giving up on testing using Python's stdout for the immediate output stream. This is a very useful feature, allowing users to make Python based commands that produce a bunch of output, and stream the output as it is being gathered rather than having the command stall and then dump a

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-13 Thread Enrico Granata via lldb-commits
Author: enrico Date: Wed Jan 13 12:11:45 2016 New Revision: 257644 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=257644=rev Log: Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-13 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:15 AM Enrico Granata via lldb-commits < lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > + > +class CommandScriptImmediateOutputTestCase (PExpectTest): > Does the bug that you were trying to fix occur only when using the command_script.py file from the lldb command line? If you

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-13 Thread Enrico Granata via lldb-commits
> On Jan 13, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Zachary Turner wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:15 AM Enrico Granata via lldb-commits > > wrote: > + > +class CommandScriptImmediateOutputTestCase (PExpectTest): > Does

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-13 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:25 AM Enrico Granata wrote: > On Jan 13, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Zachary Turner wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:15 AM Enrico Granata via lldb-commits < > lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> + >> +class

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-13 Thread Enrico Granata via lldb-commits
> On Jan 13, 2016, at 11:26 AM, Zachary Turner wrote: > > Thanks! btw would having the command write its output to a file instead of > stdout solve the pexpect problme as well? > That’s possible - but I would need to play with it a little bit to convince myself that it

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-13 Thread Enrico Granata via lldb-commits
> On Jan 13, 2016, at 10:34 AM, Zachary Turner wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:25 AM Enrico Granata > wrote: >> On Jan 13, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Zachary Turner > >

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-13 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
Thanks! btw would having the command write its output to a file instead of stdout solve the pexpect problme as well? On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:22 AM Enrico Granata wrote: > > On Jan 13, 2016, at 10:34 AM, Zachary Turner wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 13,

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r257644 - Fix an issue where scripted commands would not actually print any of their output if an immediate output file was set in the result object via a Python file object

2016-01-13 Thread Ying Chen via lldb-commits
Please see attached log file. Thanks, Ying On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Enrico Granata wrote: > From the buildbot log it’s quite hard to tell what could be going on > > Is there any chance you guys could run the test by hand with the “-t -v” > flags to the dotest.py