Skip to content

Conversation

@chriseplettsonos
Copy link
Contributor

If the architectures argument is empty (because there are no architectures to be stripped), this method will produce and execute an invalid lipo command because it will contain no -remove arguments. To fix this, I make the method a no-op if the input list of architectures is empty.

If the architectures argument is empty (because there are no architectures to be stripped), this method will produce and execute an invalid lipo command because it will contain no -remove arguments. To fix this, I make the method a no-op if the input list of architectures is empty.
Copy link
Contributor

@elliottwilliams elliottwilliams left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks great, thank you! We do something like this already in nonDestructivelyStripArchitectures but this impacts dSYM embedding via copyDebugSymbolsForFramework.

@elliottwilliams elliottwilliams changed the title Fix invalid lipo command in stripArchitectures() Fix invalid lipo command in stripArchitectures() when embedding dSYMs Mar 25, 2021
@elliottwilliams elliottwilliams merged commit 19a7f97 into Carthage:master Mar 25, 2021
@danielrbrowne
Copy link

@elliottwilliams / @chriseplettsonos I realise this is merged in already, but I've been active on an open issue for a little while RE: invalid lipo commands observed whilst executing the Copy Frameworks build phase, and this change seems kind of related. Would this change resolve #3112 (and #3120 which seems like the same lipo error), and if so will this fix land in 0.38.0?

@chriseplettsonos
Copy link
Contributor Author

Indeed, I was actually experiencing the problem on the copy-frameworks phase. I imagine this should resolve those issues.

@elliottwilliams
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah, that looks right to me. Thanks for surfacing those issues – i've closed them.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants