Kryzstof is the original author, so his name should probably stick. You could add lines for
Reviewed by: Vijay on date: ... I think that's standard enough All the best, Cillian On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, 17:22 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, <vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I have a question which I forgot to ask before. > Should the coverage.py and symbol-sets.ini files have mine and/or > Cillian's name > included in the copyright notice? > > --vijayk > On 26 July 2018 at 13:09, Vijay Kumar Banerjee <vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I have added all the libs in cpukit and commented them out. >> Please have a look at the attached file. >> >> On 26 July 2018 at 04:50, Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Vijay Kumar Banerjee < >>> vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> --- >>>> tester/rtems/testing/coverage/symbol-sets.ini | 11 ++++++++--- >>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/tester/rtems/testing/coverage/symbol-sets.ini >>>> b/tester/rtems/testing/coverage/symbol-sets.ini >>>> index a2ec7bc..3900f14 100644 >>>> --- a/tester/rtems/testing/coverage/symbol-sets.ini >>>> +++ b/tester/rtems/testing/coverage/symbol-sets.ini >>>> @@ -29,8 +29,13 @@ >>>> # >>>> >>>> [symbol-sets] >>>> -sets = score,rtems >>>> +sets = score,rtems,libblock,libcrypt,libcsupport,libmd,libnetworking >>>> >>>> [libraries] >>>> -score = @BUILD-TARGET@/c/@BSP@/cpukit/score/libscore.a >>>> -rtems = @BUILD-TARGET@/c/@BSP@/cpukit/rtems/librtems.a >>>> +score = @BUILD-TARGET@/c/@BSP@/cpukit/score/libscore.a >>>> +rtems = @BUILD-TARGET@/c/@BSP@/cpukit/rtems/librtems.a >>>> +libblock = @BUILD-TARGET@/c/@BSP@/cpukit/libblock/libblock.a >>>> +libcrypt = @BUILD-TARGET@/c/@BSP@/cpukit/libcrypt/libcrypt.a >>>> +libcsupport = @BUILD-TARGET@/c/@BSP@ >>>> /cpukit/libcsupport/libcsupport.a >>>> +libmd = @BUILD-TARGET@/c/@BSP@/cpukit/libmd/libmd.a >>>> +libnetworking = @BUILD-TARGET@/c/@BSP@ >>>> /cpukit/libnetworking/libnetworking.a >>>> >>> >>> To be at parity with the old reports but reported on finer granularity, >>> follow the list at >>> >>> https://git.rtems.org/rtems-testing/tree/rtems-coverage/do_coverage#n507 >>> >>> and check what is not listed there that is in cpukit now. For example, >>> jffs2 >>> isn't listed in the above. But the things consciously skipped have a good >>> reason. Add a list of the ones not included. It may make sense to >>> have something like this for the ones deliberately skipped: >>> >>> # librpc = @....libXXX.a >>> >>> It will make auditing what's in the cpukit versus the ini file easier. >>> That's why my old script has them in order and commented out the >>> ones we were not ready to do or never would. >>> >>> But for sure, add posix, sapi, libdl, individual filesystem, and catch >>> the libmisc subdirectories listed in the old script for inclusion. for >>> new >>> libmisc content, we can make a decision. >>> >>> Don't include libnetworking. As a general rule, we don't do coverage >>> testing >>> on networking or any (complex) third party software. >>> >>> I don't think dtc will get coverage either. >>> >>> That should get us closer. I expect you will find some libraries >>> to ask questions on. :) >>> >>> --joel >>> >>> >>>> -- >>>> 2.14.4 >>>> >>>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ > 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
