[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       llvm-commits
Subject:    [PATCH] D112879: [MachO] Use error instead of fatal for missing -arch
From:       Shoaib Meenai via Phabricator via llvm-commits <llvm-commits () lists ! llvm ! org>
Date:       2021-10-31 22:56:03
Message-ID: qE7A24OhTquhUI3FiyMNeQ () ismtpd0155p1iad2 ! sendgrid ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

smeenai added inline comments.


================
Comment at: lld/test/MachO/color-diagnostics.test:9
 
-# COLOR: {{lld: .\[0;31merror: .\[0munknown argument '-xyz'}}
-# COLOR: {{lld: .\[0;31merror: .\[0mcannot open /nosuchfile}}
+# COLOR-UNKNOWN-ARGUMENT: {{lld: .\[0;31merror: .\[0munknown argument '-xyz'}}
+
----------------
int3 wrote:
> do we really need to test this particular error? I was under the impression that \
> this test was meant solely to test that the correct ANSI color codes were emitted, \
> and the exact error message isn't so important
I was trying to preserve the behavior of the original, but yeah, I don't think \
there's any value to the additional test.


================
Comment at: lld/test/MachO/search-paths-darwin.test:6
 
-RUN: not ld64.lld -arch x86_64 -v -L%t1 -F%t2 2>&1 | FileCheck -DLDIR=%t1 -DFDIR=%t2 \
%s +RUN: not ld64.lld -arch x86_64 -platform_version macos 10.5 11.0 -v -L%t1 -F%t2 \
2>&1 | FileCheck -DLDIR=%t1 -DFDIR=%t2 %s  CHECK:      Library search paths:
----------------
int3 wrote:
> hm, why can't we use `%lld` here?
It adds a `-syslibroot` argument, which we want to avoid for this test.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D112879/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D112879

_______________________________________________
llvm-commits mailing list
llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]