-------- In message <CABoVN9Aym1aQj+=7k93eyf1jyzmcq9ys0kmg3rctkwtskxh...@mail.gmail.com>, Dridi Boukelmoune writes:
>> I have also, at the same time raised the official project goal to >> "90%+ of *all* executable code tested automatically". > >Only line coverage? Nothing for branches? > >90% branch coverage is even a bigger challenge ;) That's probably impossible, given the number of asserts we have. >Another thing: if we want proper code coverage reports, [...] Are my my l33t HTML skills not proper ?! Seriously: This is good enough to tell us which bits of our code isn't covered by "make check", which is the important part. Merging in data from other runs would not be a problem, my scripts already has support for merging because some sourcefiles drop .gcda in multiple directories already. We'd just need to set up a client to run "make check" and submit a condensed version of the raw data. If you feel like running a Linux (or other) client, let me know and we can get it set up, I think my current plan is to run this only once per night. Poul-Henning -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ varnish-dev mailing list varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
