Re: [lldb-dev] Adding D language demangling support

2016-09-26 Thread Johan Engelen via lldb-dev
Timothee, do you intend to work on this? What can I do to help? In the meanwhile, I'd appreciate it if someone could take a look at https://reviews.llvm.org/D24794 (currently, debugging D code is very much broken without that change). -Johan On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Greg Clayton via lld

[lldb-dev] [Bug 12355] Symbolization does not work with -pie

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=12355 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 15719] 'image lookup' and 'frame info' disagree, image lookup is more right

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15719 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 15036] LLDB is unable to parse DWARF data generated by GCC (4.6)

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15036 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 15591] ASSERT when building record layout for anonymous structures.

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15591 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 15936] LLDB incorrectly unwinds a call stack that contains a function with an illegal instruction

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15936 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 16000] SBBreakpoint::SetCallback() function does not work as expected

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16000 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 17096] Incorrect stop reason data for multiple breakpoints

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=17096 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 17227] Disassembly is incorrect when using lldb with ELF core files

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=17227 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 17385] registers unavailable in the TestFrames.py inferior stack frames above frame 0

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=17385 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 17189] Frame variable command isn't working for Go programs

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=17189 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 17628] lldb should support JIT debugging

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=17628 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 15302] LLDB does not print 'anonymous namespace' prefix for variable names (if inferior built with GCC on Linux)

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15302 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 18064] Silent tests

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18064 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 30526] New: deadlock when calling SBThread::GetSelectedFrame

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=30526 Bug ID: 30526 Summary: deadlock when calling SBThread::GetSelectedFrame Product: lldb Version: 3.9 Hardware: PC OS: Windows NT Status: NEW Severity: normal

[lldb-dev] [Bug 18077] liblldb.so fails to link under GNU/Linux powerpc & mips

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18077 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 18579] Can't access to anonymous struct and union

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18579 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 18965] Can't debug with gdbserver on Linux with top of tree lldb

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18965 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 19248] replace custom unittest2.skipUnless clauses for which we have more specific @attributes

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19248 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 19245] LLDB commits suicide after failing launch a process twice.

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19245 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 19695] [PATCH] Build fails with swig in non-standard location

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19695 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 19783] lldb doesn't look for symbols in /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19783 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 19818] Clean up unused variable warnings in MI code

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19818 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 19826] ObjectContainerBSDArchive::Object::Extract() crashes if extracted file name is exactly 16 characters long

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19826 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 20143] lldb crashes

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20143 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 20203] scripts/CMakeLists.txt missing script lldb_python_module.cmake

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20203 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 20233] TestWatchpointMultipleThreads.test_watchpoint_multiple_threads_with_dwarf fails on Linux clang

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20233 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 20319] Crashes on run with Segmentation Fault

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20319 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 20352] test_stop_hook_multiple_threads_with_dwarf hangs on Linux

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20352 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[lldb-dev] [Bug 20687] lldb segfault on go program

2016-09-26 Thread via lldb-dev
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20687 lab...@google.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

Re: [lldb-dev] Adding D language demangling support

2016-09-26 Thread Greg Clayton via lldb-dev
Just did, and it looks good. > On Sep 26, 2016, at 3:49 AM, Johan Engelen wrote: > > Timothee, do you intend to work on this? > What can I do to help? > > In the meanwhile, I'd appreciate it if someone could take a look at > https://reviews.llvm.org/D24794 (currently, debugging D code is very

[lldb-dev] YouTrack e-mails

2016-09-26 Thread Anton Korobeynikov via lldb-dev
Dear All, Today some of you received dozen e-mails from YouTrack connected with something which looks like LLVM PRs. Please ignore them and I do apologize that you received them. Here is some background. As you may know we had a lot of problems with Bugzilla recently due to spam activity. Current

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] YouTrack e-mails

2016-09-26 Thread Renato Golin via lldb-dev
On 26 September 2016 at 19:12, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev wrote: > Note that nothing was decided yet, it might be very probable that > we'll continue use Bugzilla, we're just evaluating other options and > collecting the relevant information. We will try to make sure that > there will be no m