> How do you mean that? Why would be that dependent?
I don't really understand the question... The coverage result contains the
working directory where the program was run so by definition it depends on the
working directory. Put it differently, run the same program in 2 different
directories
On 05/21/2018 10:17 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> Simple format extension which prints working directory of TU when it was
>> compiled. It's requested by LCOV folks.
>
> Can we make that optional, please? Having the coverage results depends on
> the
> current working directory is quite annoying,
> Simple format extension which prints working directory of TU when it was
> compiled. It's requested by LCOV folks.
Can we make that optional, please? Having the coverage results depends on the
current working directory is quite annoying, to say the least.
--
Eric Botcazou
On 05/18/2018 08:42 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
V2: pwd is renamed to cwd, which is a better name.
Martin
ok thanks.
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell
V2: pwd is renamed to cwd, which is a better name.
Martin
>From a42365bc6987fc13d3a3cd4b98d7d64d94f7f318 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: marxin
Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 13:58:58 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Print working directory to gcov files (PR
gcov-profile/84846).
gcc/ChangeLog:
2018-05
Hi.
Simple format extension which prints working directory of TU when it was
compiled.
It's requested by LCOV folks.
Survives make check -k -j10 RUNTESTFLAGS="gcov.exp"
Ready for trunk?
Thanks,
Martin
gcc/ChangeLog:
2018-05-18 Martin Liska
PR gcov-profile/84846
* coverage.
