hhb added a comment. In D69931#1736607 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69931#1736607>, @labath wrote:
> In principle, this looks pretty similar to D67942 > <https://reviews.llvm.org/D67942>, and my opinion on it is the same -- I > don't think we should be in the business of trying to package the transitive > set of lldb dependencies. I think the lldb install target should install the > stuff that it has built itself, and the rest should be up to some higher > level packaging system. +1 it will never end if we go down this way. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D69931/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D69931 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
