Re: Subversion testsuite coverage

Sander Striker wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-03-07 at 10:54, David Kimdon wrote:
>
>>I put a summary of Subversion's testsuite coverage up at:
>>
>>http://people.debian.org/~dwhedon/subversion/gcov-report.html
>
> Mind if I commit the patch to configure (to enable producing this
> data) to tools/dev ?

I guess you are asking David if he minds. Maybe he thought, as I did, that you were asking the other developers.

The patch to configure.in and Makefile.in, which is linked from that page, looks neat in the way that it just adds one block to each of those files and is enabled by an option to 'configure'. It does not look quite right in detail, though:

> Index: Makefile.in
> ===================================================================
> --- Makefile.in (revision 8904)
> +++ Makefile.in (working copy)
> @@ -326,6 +326,37 @@
> @$(MAKE) check \
> BASE_URL=svn+ssh://localhost`pwd`/subversion/tests/clients/cmdline
>
> +gcov:
> + @echo -n "Collecting source files ..." ; \
> + FILES=`find subversion/ -path '*/tests/*' -prune -o \
> + -name '*.c' -print`; \
> + echo "Done." ; \
> + echo "Coverage report Subversion r`svnversion .`<br>" \

This isn't exactly the same patch that produced the web page: the message is different, for a start.

> + echo "`date`<br>" \
> + > gcov-report.html; \
> + > gcov-report.html; \

Huh? Was one of these redirections meant to be attached to the previous 'echo "Coverage..."' command, and the other one meant to use ">>"?

The rest of the patch looks OK to me, but I guess that wasn't the latest version of it.

This could parhaps be committed directly into our build system, but maybe it is a bit too specialised. Certainly it would be nice to have it in tools/dev/.

- Julian

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Mar 12 02:25:56 2004