release/20.x: [lldb] Remove PATH workaround for Android (#124682)

[llvmbot]

Backport 9326633

Requested by: @brad0

[llvmbot]

@labath What do you think about merging this PR to the release branch?

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-lldb

Author: None (llvmbot)

Changes

Backport 9326633

Requested by: @brad0

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124898.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) lldb/source/Host/posix/ProcessLauncherPosixFork.cpp (+1-12)

diff --git a/lldb/source/Host/posix/ProcessLauncherPosixFork.cpp b/lldb/source/Host/posix/ProcessLauncherPosixFork.cpp
index 7d856954684c49..3e956290c3055a 100644
--- a/lldb/source/Host/posix/ProcessLauncherPosixFork.cpp
+++ b/lldb/source/Host/posix/ProcessLauncherPosixFork.cpp
@@ -230,16 +230,6 @@ MakeForkActions(const ProcessLaunchInfo &info) {
   return result;
 }
 
-static Environment::Envp FixupEnvironment(Environment env) {
-#ifdef __ANDROID__
-  // If there is no PATH variable specified inside the environment then set the
-  // path to /system/bin. It is required because the default path used by
-  // execve() is wrong on android.
-  env.try_emplace("PATH", "/system/bin");
-#endif
-  return env.getEnvp();
-}
-
 ForkLaunchInfo::ForkLaunchInfo(const ProcessLaunchInfo &info)
     : separate_process_group(
           info.GetFlags().Test(eLaunchFlagLaunchInSeparateProcessGroup)),
@@ -247,8 +237,7 @@ ForkLaunchInfo::ForkLaunchInfo(const ProcessLaunchInfo &info)
       disable_aslr(info.GetFlags().Test(eLaunchFlagDisableASLR)),
       wd(info.GetWorkingDirectory().GetPath()),
       argv(info.GetArguments().GetConstArgumentVector()),
-      envp(FixupEnvironment(info.GetEnvironment())),
-      actions(MakeForkActions(info)) {}
+      envp(info.GetEnvironment().getEnvp()), actions(MakeForkActions(info)) {}
 
 HostProcess
 ProcessLauncherPosixFork::LaunchProcess(const ProcessLaunchInfo &launch_info,

[labath]

What's the motivation? It's very early in the release cycle, so I guess it'd be fine, but it might also be fine to let this bake in trunk, just in case it does turn out breaking something...

[brad0]

What's the motivation? It's very early in the release cycle, so I guess it'd be fine, but it might also be fine to let this bake in trunk, just in case it does turn out breaking something...

Just because it was early in the cycle, but you have a point. I'll leave it for now.