The test (added in #88494) fails precisely in the way it would fail if the inferior was not resumed after detaching. We don't have a x86-64 lldb bot right now, but it's a safe bet the issue is not architecture-specific.
The test (added in #88494) fails precisely in the way it would fail if the inferior was *not* resumed after detaching. We don't have a x86-64 lldb bot right now, but it's a safe bet the issue is not architecture-specific.
The test (added in #88494) fails precisely in the way it would fail if the inferior was not resumed after detaching. We don't have a x86-64 lldb bot right now, but it's a safe bet the issue is not architecture-specific.