On Mon, 14 May 2018, 23:24 Cillian O'Donnell, <cpodonne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 14 May 2018, 09:50 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, <vijaykumar9...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 14 May 2018 at 12:10, Cillian O'Donnell <cpodonne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 13 May 2018, 22:15 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, <
>>> vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 14 May 2018 at 02:15, Cillian O'Donnell <cpodonne...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> tester/covoar/covoar.cc | 10 +++-------
>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/tester/covoar/covoar.cc b/tester/covoar/covoar.cc
>>>>> index 5c87402..c6b0589 100644
>>>>> --- a/tester/covoar/covoar.cc
>>>>> +++ b/tester/covoar/covoar.cc
>>>>> @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ static void createBuildPath(Executables&
>>>>> executablesToAnalyze,
>>>>> if (buildPrefix.empty()) {
>>>>> buildPrefix = *pri;
>>>>> } else {
>>>>> - if (buildBSP != *pri) {
>>>>> + if (buildPrefix != *pri) {
>>>>> fail = "executable build prefix does not match: " +
>>>>> buildPrefix;
>>>>> break;
>>>>> }
>>>>> @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ static void createBuildPath(Executables&
>>>>> executablesToAnalyze,
>>>>> if (buildPath.empty()) {
>>>>> buildPath = thisBuildPath;
>>>>> } else {
>>>>> - if (buildBSP != *pri) {
>>>>> + if (buildPath != thisBuildPath) {
>>>>> fail = "executable build path does not match: " +
>>>>> buildPath;
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>> @@ -316,11 +316,7 @@ int main(
>>>>> std::cerr << "warning: Unable to read executable: " <<
>>>>> argv[i] << std::endl;
>>>>> } else {
>>>>> coverageFileName = argv[i];
>>>>> - coverageFileName.replace(
>>>>> - coverageFileName.length() - executableExtension.size(),
>>>>> - executableExtension.size(),
>>>>> - coverageExtension
>>>>> - );
>>>>> + coverageFileName.append( "." + coverageExtension );
>>>>>
>>>>> if (!FileIsReadable( coverageFileName.c_str() )) {
>>>>> std::cerr << "warning: Unable to read coverage file: " <<
>>>>> coverageFileName
>>>>> --
>>>>> 2.7.4
>>>>>
>>>>> This worked !
>>>>
>>>
>>> Cool, looks like we're onto fixing the reports then. If you take a look
>>> at report.html only the headings are there. I think what might be wrong
>>> there is it's just searching in the wrong place for the results. The fix
>>> for that will lie in coverage.py. Warning about coverage.py, there could be
>>> whole sections in there that might just be deleted, it's still being
>>> reorganized.
>>>
>>> Are you working on it ?
>>
>
> Yeah I'll be hacking away at that, won't make much of a dent till the
> weekend though.
>
>> Also the absolute path needs to be parsed form the score-symbol.ini for
>> running it from out of the build tree
>>
>
> This is true.
>
>> Or seeing as covoar is in good shape now and I think the txt report is ok
>>> (you should check and make sure of that). You could move onto gcov, lcov
>>> stuff. Figure out the state of the gcov support in covoar, generate gcov
>>> reports, compare the results.
>>>
>> I'll creat a new thread for gcov report then.
>>
>
> Cool, you're gonna do the gcov stuff then.
>
yeah. hopefully it will show some movement soon. :)
> _______________________________________________
>>>>> devel mailing list
>>>>> devel@rtems.org
>>>>> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
