On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 12:00 +0200, Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
> On Mi, 2006-09-27 at 14:43 +0200, Paul Vriens wrote:
>
> > Got an email from a Coverity guy.
>
> > Apparently they have some backlog but Wine is by no means not covered
> > anymore.
> > Things should settle down soon and we can look fo
On Mi, 2006-09-27 at 14:43 +0200, Paul Vriens wrote:
> Got an email from a Coverity guy.
> Apparently they have some backlog but Wine is by no means not covered
> anymore.
> Things should settle down soon and we can look forward to some nice
> reports again.
Great news.
Examining and fixing all
On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 11:25 +0200, Paul Vriens wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 11:15 +0200, Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
> > On Di, 2006-09-12 at 08:51 +0200, Paul Vriens wrote:
> >
> > > the latest run (with report) on the Coverity site seems to be from July
> > > 21st.
> >
> > > Does anybody know m
On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 11:15 +0200, Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
> On Di, 2006-09-12 at 08:51 +0200, Paul Vriens wrote:
>
> > the latest run (with report) on the Coverity site seems to be from July
> > 21st.
>
> > Does anybody know more about the why?
>
> What comes in my mind, that they offered the
On Di, 2006-09-12 at 08:51 +0200, Paul Vriens wrote:
> the latest run (with report) on the Coverity site seems to be from July
> 21st.
> Does anybody know more about the why?
What comes in my mind, that they offered there Service to Wine
to use it as an Advertisement like:
"Coverity detected >8
Hi,
the latest run (with report) on the Coverity site seems to be from July
21st. It appears that the main page is updated though (not for the lines
of code but for the errors fixed).
Does anybody know more about the why? I've tried to contact Coverity for
the last month and my last email (where
