Re: [lldb-dev] test results look typical?

2015-09-18 Thread Todd Fiala via lldb-dev
Great, thanks for filing, Dawn! On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 2:08 PM, wrote: > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 05:37:43PM -0700, via lldb-dev wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 03:37:52PM -0700, Todd Fiala via lldb-dev wrote: > > > On Linux on non-virtualized hardware, I currently see the

Re: [lldb-dev] test results look typical?

2015-09-17 Thread via lldb-dev
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 05:37:43PM -0700, via lldb-dev wrote: > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 03:37:52PM -0700, Todd Fiala via lldb-dev wrote: > > On Linux on non-virtualized hardware, I currently see the failures below on > > Ubuntu 14.04.2 using a setup like this: > > [...] > > > > ninja check-lldb

Re: [lldb-dev] test results look typical?

2015-08-25 Thread Todd Fiala via lldb-dev
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 5:40 AM, Tamas Berghammer tbergham...@google.com wrote: Going back to the original question I think you have more test failures then expected. As Chaoren mentioned all TestDataFormatterLibc* tests are failing because of a missing dependency, Thanks, Tamas. I'm going

Re: [lldb-dev] test results look typical?

2015-08-25 Thread Todd Fiala via lldb-dev
So specifying CC=/usr/bin/gcc CXX=/usr/bin/g++ cmake -GNinja ... did the trick for getting rid of the libc++ issues. I think I may try to see if we can get those tests to make a run-time check to see if the inferior is linked against libc++, and if not, to skip it. We can have lldb do it by

Re: [lldb-dev] test results look typical?

2015-08-25 Thread via lldb-dev
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 04:39:14PM -0700, Todd Fiala wrote: I may dig into that if nobody beats me to it. I did the original multiprocessing work on dosep ~1.5 years ago and it may be doing something goofy. Cool! It would be awesome if you could have a look - I've been meaning to dig

Re: [lldb-dev] test results look typical?

2015-08-25 Thread Chaoren Lin via lldb-dev
Sorry, kernel bug is probably the wrong word. It's a problem specific to WMware. On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Chaoren Lin chaor...@google.com wrote: Are you running VMware by any chance? TestStepOverWatchpoint fails on VMware because of a kernel bug. On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Todd

Re: [lldb-dev] test results look typical?

2015-08-24 Thread Chaoren Lin via lldb-dev
Ah okay, so we are working with libc++ on Ubuntu, that's good to hear. Pre-14.04 I gave up on it. We're still using libstdc++ for lldb itself. libc++ is used to compile inferiors for the TestDataFormatterLibcc* tests. I don't actually know if libc++ works with lldb. Sorry to get your hopes

Re: [lldb-dev] test results look typical?

2015-08-24 Thread Todd Fiala via lldb-dev
Ah drats! Okay. Baby steps :-D On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Chaoren Lin chaor...@google.com wrote: Ah okay, so we are working with libc++ on Ubuntu, that's good to hear. Pre-14.04 I gave up on it. We're still using libstdc++ for lldb itself. libc++ is used to compile inferiors for

Re: [lldb-dev] test results look typical?

2015-08-24 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-dev
Can't comment on the failures for Linux, but I don't think we have a good handle on the unexpected successes. I only added that information to the output about a week ago, before that unexpected successes were actually going unnoticed. It's likely that someone could just go in there and remove

Re: [lldb-dev] test results look typical?

2015-08-24 Thread Todd Fiala via lldb-dev
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Zachary Turner ztur...@google.com wrote: Can't comment on the failures for Linux, but I don't think we have a good handle on the unexpected successes. I only added that information to the output about a week ago, before that unexpected successes were actually