JDevlieghere added a comment. In D83787#2150926 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D83787#2150926>, @labath wrote:
> I suppose this might have been because someone wanted to ensure > cleanupSubprocesses is not called twice (if multiple subprocesses are > spawned). It looks like it should be safe to do so, though it's not > completely ideal. TBH, I'm not sure why this needs to be a tear down "hook". > I t seems like this could just be a separate step in the normal `tearDown` > function... Makes sense, I'll move it in the regular teardown. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D83787/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D83787 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
