Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 16:01:53 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: About release of gcc-2.95.3 for DJGPP
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10103251457170.15102-100000@acp3bf>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010325160009.25476A@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


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.  Having to reboot the machine or copy the data files to 
another machine slows down this process tremendously.