From: Jan Stancek on gitlab.com https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1433#note_709281351
> I am not sure if that hides other things that should be enabled It does, but gcov was always best-effort kind of feature. It's not built by default in ARK or RHEL. So I didn't think anybody would mind. > I wonder if that causes issues later with -rt and -auto variants later Potential issue with full gcov variant is that number of configs could expand a lot if you add more variants. Since each variant would also have gcov variant. > I thought about using something like kernel.local but calling it kernel.gcov I was thinking about something similar as well. I'll push what I'm trying at the moment. It's using config tools to build/verify full gcov config during srpm creation - so config check targets should catch any issues. But it uses only partial gcov config in SRPM and then merges it on top of current config, similar to kernel.local. _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
