I didn't realize it was going to get updated so soon, but the versions on
that page were at "8.16.5" for the Windows and Linux versions when I sent
my email a couple days ago.
It also appears the versions for the OSs aren't all updated at the same
time (.6 seems to only includes Windows/macOS
Eric Joyner wrote:
> I'm reviving an ancient thread, but is Bullseye truly dropping FreeBSD
> support? Do you have a link to something that shows that?
>
> I still see a FreeBSD tarball in their download archive page for the newest
> version of their tool, which seems to be 8.16.5.
It appears
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 8:38 AM Ed Maste wrote:
>
> > > Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting
> > > coverage information from the kernel.
> > >
> > That's part of Matt Macy's gcov project, right?.
>
> No, /dev/kcov is independent of, and predates, Matt Macy's work.
> > Have you looked into /dev/kcov. This is used by SYZKALLER for getting
> > coverage information from the kernel.
> >
> That's part of Matt Macy's gcov project, right?.
No, /dev/kcov is independent of, and predates, Matt Macy's work. It
provides broadly the same sort of information, but not
I'm reviving an ancient thread, but is Bullseye truly dropping FreeBSD
support? Do you have a link to something that shows that?
I still see a FreeBSD tarball in their download archive page for the newest
version of their tool, which seems to be 8.16.5.
- Eric
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 12:08 PM
The whole point of adding gcov support was for integrating with the
ZoL CI framework which does coverage. So it very much does work with
modules. Not sure where that comes from.
-M
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 6:52 AM Alan Somers wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote:
> >
> >
Read the bug report. I can't even load modules when I build with GCOV.
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 1:04 PM Matthew Macy wrote:
>
> The whole point of adding gcov support was for integrating with the
> ZoL CI framework which does coverage. So it very much does work with
> modules. Not sure where that
> On 8. Aug 2019, at 15:52, Alan Somers wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote:
>>>
>>> Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD.
>>>
>>> We are looking for an alternative for kernel module
On 08-Aug-19 18:14, Michael Tuexen wrote:
On 8. Aug 2019, at 16:16, Slava Shwartsman wrote:
On 08-Aug-19 16:52, Alan Somers wrote:
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote:
On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote:
Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for
> On 8. Aug 2019, at 16:16, Slava Shwartsman wrote:
>
>
>
> On 08-Aug-19 16:52, Alan Somers wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote:
Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD.
On 08-Aug-19 16:52, Alan Somers wrote:
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote:
On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote:
Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD.
We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis.
Mostly
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:42 AM Michael Tuexen wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote:
> >
> > Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD.
> >
> > We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis.
> > Mostly interested in code coverage
> On 8. Aug 2019, at 14:24, Slava Shwartsman wrote:
>
> Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD.
>
> We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis.
> Mostly interested in code coverage (for now).
>
> Any suggestions that work for you?
Have you looked
In message , Slava Shwartsman
writes:
>Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD.
>
>We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis.
>Mostly interested in code coverage (for now).
>
>Any suggestions that work for you?
Back in early days, I fixed it so
Apparently, Bullseye are dropping support for FreeBSD.
We are looking for an alternative for kernel module run time analysis.
Mostly interested in code coverage (for now).
Any suggestions that work for you?
Slava
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org
15 matches
Mail list logo
