Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2001/03/25/09:14:27
On Sun, 25 Mar 2001, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2001, Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:
>
> > OTOH, it's not strictly necessary for gcov itself to work in SFN, as long
> > as an LFN environment is available at all: the data files carry short
> > names (foo.bb, foo.da, foo.bbg), and it should suffice to run gcov in the
> > LFN environment, later, in case the target program itself doesn't work in
> > LFN.
>
> This is extremely inconvenient, since coverage analysis usually involves
> repeated runs of the program with different inputs, using the coverage as
> guidelines.
Fully agreed. I wrote the above reply before seeing all of the answers in
that thread which proceeded to define a scheme that might, indeed,
actually work on DOS, while not creating too much of a deviation from the
documented behaviour as found in the gcov docs. SFN is a pest, but that
method of filling in the remainder of the filename with 'gcov', from the
right, should indeed work in most of the typical cases.
> Having to reboot the machine or copy the data files to
> another machine slows down this process tremendously.
Sure. Except maybe in NT, where the output generated by a DJGPP
program restricted to SFN should be analysable by gprof from a native
GCC port (after patching it for binary file handling, that is :-), and all
that without any reboot.
--
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.
- Raw text -