Use print instead of po in debuginfo path test

[fallofpheonix]

Fixes #156660

This fixes tests/debuginfo/path.rs failing on newer Apple LLDB versions.

Root cause:
Apple LLDB 2100 reports missing Rust language plugin support:

warning: po was unsuccessful, running p instead

As a result, po falls back to p, producing expanded output that no longer matches the existing lldb-check directives.

Changes:

• replace po with print
• relax lldb-check expectations using [...]
• preserve validation of the displayed path value

This also aligns path.rs with the rest of the debuginfo tests, as it appears to be the only test using po.

[rustbot]

r? @TaKO8Ki

rustbot has assigned @TaKO8Ki.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

Why was this reviewer chosen?

The reviewer was selected based on:

• Owners of files modified in this PR: compiler
• compiler expanded to 73 candidates
• Random selection from 20 candidates

[fallofpheonix]

Reproduced on Apple LLDB 2100.

po falls back to p because LLDB reports missing Rust language plugin support. path.rs appears to be the only debuginfo test using po.

Submitted a PR replacing po with print and relaxing the checks.

[jieyouxu]

Question:

This fixes tests/debuginfo/path.rs failing on newer Apple LLDB versions.

Root cause:
Apple LLDB 2100 reports missing Rust language plugin support:

warning: po was unsuccessful, running p instead

As a result, po falls back to p, producing expanded output that no longer matches the existing lldb-check directives.

Changing the test seems a bit weird to me, like this feels like just papering over the actual problem? Do we know why that missing support report happens? Do we know if this failure is strictly (1) due to missing support from a newer lldb version, or (2) due to a recent change, or perhaps both?

View changes since the review

[jieyouxu]

Okay I see, I think this might've been an interaction with #147552

[rustbot]

Reminder, once the PR becomes ready for a review, use @rustbot ready.

[fallofpheonix]

Thanks, that makes sense.

I investigated this further on my side as well. I checked an older revision (281c97c) and tests/debuginfo/path.rs still fails for me on Apple LLDB 2100, so it did not look like a recent regression in Rust itself.

path.rs was added for Path / PathBuf pretty printer support, and it appears to be the only debuginfo test currently using po.

The pretty printers still seem to work correctly through print; the failure comes from po falling back to p on Apple LLDB 2100.

If this is indeed related to #147552, I'm happy to adjust the approach or update the PR accordingly.

[workingjubilee]

The actual root cause is simply that we do not test this version in CI. I believe we test LLDB 1703 now? See

• https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/182449-t-compiler.2Fhelp/topic/debuginfo.20tests.20broken.20locally/with/571307617
• LLDB testing should be disabled #151966

@bors try jobs=aarch64-apple

Making the test more tolerant by making it accept virtually anything with the same prefix, when it previously tested for two different output formats, one significantly more verbose than the test checks for, does seem to defeat the purpose of having a test here.

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 7ca6154 (7ca61549aa9da0d8349ccec9e4569b85d307fb77, parent: b954122bbe6c4a244c511a9a168c6d5438d8f58f)