On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 5:22 PM Stephan Bergmann <sberg...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > I agree with you that the status quo would not be useful (and don't > think you are annoying in any way). > > I still strongly (but naively, without digging into the code in any way) > assume that those tests are not failing for you all the time because > they would deterministically fail for gcov builds in general, but "just" > because your gcov builds are sufficiently slow. > > Ideally, the authors of those tests could rework them so that they don't > depend on performance characteristics that certain builds cannot meet. > Okay. Well, I guess that then means that I should let this go for now, and I'm now off to the next step of my Grand Masterplan (tm) of trying to get regular automated lcov reports reinstated: Seeing if I can rework the existing script [1] so that you only have to run it once (with supplying obvious flags of where the sourcecode lives, and where you want the generated lcov 'tracefiles' and html report to go), instead of having to break things up in multiple 'steps' as it is now written. If/when I have something that does what it should as far as I can test/tell, I'll put the modified version of the script (and README) up for review in Gerrit, and ask around on this list if/who is interested in reviewing the modified version. Thanks. [1] https://git.libreoffice.org/buildbot/+/refs/heads/master/lcov-report/ - Maarten
