https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24974
Bug ID: 24974
Summary: Debian Makefile lldb build is broken
Product: lldb
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24976
Bug ID: 24976
Summary: Data from SBProcess::PutSTDIN appears in
SBProcess::GetSTDOUT
Product: lldb
Version: 3.6
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Hi,
Thanks for the report. Since you are suspecting a deadlock, could you
post a backtrace of all the threads (thread apply all backtrace). It
would be best to move this discussion to a bug in llvm.org/bugs.
> I am currently using svn revision 247535 of llvm and lldb, and I know that my
> code
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24959
Bug ID: 24959
Summary: Mismatch between binary and host architectures unless
absolute path is given
Product: lldb
Version: 3.7
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Hello all,
The following question came up while fixing up handling of process detach.
when detaching from a running process, on some platforms LLDB needs to
stop it first. Is this stop something that should be hidden from the
public view or not?
I.e. if the process state is Running, and I do a
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24958
Bug ID: 24958
Summary: lldb::SBDebugger::Terminate() results in Deadlock
Product: lldb
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Hi,
Interesting results. We were discussing the same thing last week. I
was somewhat skeptical to the ideal as I am afraid of increased
flakyness -- LLDB has hardcoded timeout values in a lot of places, and
with increased cpu contention, we might start to see this code failing
because the other
The next LLVM social in Paris will happen on October 15th, 2015. Everyone
interested in LLVM, Clang, lldb, Polly, ... is invited to join.
Note that we have slightly changed the meetup format: from now on we will
start with a presentation, which will be followed-up by the usual informal
social.
