On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 11:16:53AM -0800, Gary E. Miller via devel wrote:
> The coverity scans are not part of the GitLab CI. They run off the
> GitHub mirror.
The GitLab CI triggers the scan. See
https://gitlab.com/NTPsec/ntpsec/-/pipeline_schedules
Coverity then points at GitHub for some rea
Yo James!
On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 22:54:30 -0800
James Browning via devel wrote:
> > Can you poke it by hand?
> >
> Not as such, no. But it is easy for an authorized user to trigger a
> scheduled run at GitLab. It's under ci > schedules on the left
> sidebar.
The coverity scans are not part of the
On Feb 7, 2023 18:23, Hal Murray via devel wrote:
Thanks.
matthew.sel...@twosigma.com said:
> No. We run the Coverity CI job weekly via a schedule, ...
> I'll work on running Coverity post-merge.
I agree that running it every merge is overkill.
A button that says run-now would be nice i
Yo Hal!
On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 18:23:17 -0800
Hal Murray via devel wrote:
> Yes, it's reasonably obvious, but only after you find the right URL.
Consider it like a game of Adventure.
> > I approved your account.
>
> Thanks. I didn't get any you-were-approved mail.
>
> Do I have to explicitly
Thanks.
matthew.sel...@twosigma.com said:
>> Should we document that? Where?
> The account creation seems self-explanatory. Or did you want to document
> something else?
I don't know. I was just tossing out a suggestion based on my stumbling.
Yes, it's reasonably obvious, but only after you
On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 10:51:02PM -0800, Hal Murray via devel wrote:
>
> > Do you have a coverity account?
> > https://scan.coverity.com
> > Then go to "My Dashboard" and "Add project".
>
> Should we document that? Where?
The account creation seems self-explanatory. Or did you want to document
Yo Hal!
On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 14:03:50 -0800
Hal Murray via devel wrote:
> I took a look at the Coverity reports for ntpsec.
> There are 10 of them. 10 is a small number. We should be able to
> fix them all.
Good.
> The Coverity report that started this thread was actually a bug.
My experienc
I took a look at the Coverity reports for ntpsec.
There are 10 of them. 10 is a small number. We should be able to fix them
all.
The Coverity report that started this thread was actually a bug.
The code I had was
bool once = false;
if (once) return;
once = true;
...
I was so focus
Yo Hal!
On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 13:20:38 -0800
Hal Murray via devel wrote:
> >> OK, I propose to turn on -Wswitch-enum and fix all the warnings I
> >> find. Then I/we fix whatever Coverity complains about. If that is
> >> too painful, we can back out of -Wswitch-enum.
> > Seems good to me.
>
>> OK, I propose to turn on -Wswitch-enum and fix all the warnings I
>> find. Then I/we fix whatever Coverity complains about. If that is
>> too painful, we can back out of -Wswitch-enum.
> Seems good to me.
OK, I'll start working on it when I get time.
> There are so many Coverity warnings ab
Yo Hal!
On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 22:51:02 -0800
Hal Murray wrote:
> > I'm waiting for somebody to approve me.
>
> Where? How would I see it?
The request was stuck in my spam folder. Looks like someone beat me
to approving you.
RGDS
GARY
Yo Hal!
On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 22:51:02 -0800
Hal Murray wrote:
> Thanks.
>
> > Do you have a coverity account?
> > https://scan.coverity.com/
> > Then go to "My Dashboard" and "Add project".
>
> Should we document that? Where?
The procedure changes more often than we add cverity users.
> It
Thanks.
> Do you have a coverity account?
> https://scan.coverity.com/
> Then go to "My Dashboard" and "Add project".
Should we document that? Where?
It looks like Coverity is running over on github.
Is our copy-to-github stuff documented?
I'm waiting for somebody to approve me.
>> Date:
Yo Hal!
On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:08:21 -0800
Hal Murray wrote:
> >> But then Coverity will barf (DEADCODE) at all the defaults.
> > What purpose do they still have?
>
> None. But we have -Wswitch-default so it will barf if we remove them.
>
> They would be useful if an illegal value was pa
>> But then Coverity will barf (DEADCODE) at all the defaults.
> What purpose do they still have?
None. But we have -Wswitch-default so it will barf if we remove them.
They would be useful if an illegal value was passed in. At least in the case
that started this thread, the values are comin
Yo Hal!
On Sun, 05 Feb 2023 20:01:13 -0800
Hal Murray wrote:
> > Sadly some compilers will always complain if there is no default.
> > So I always add a default.
>
> We turn on -Wswitch-default
I like it.
> I'd like to turn on -Wswitch-enum
> That generates a handful of warnings that I'm w
> Sadly some compilers will always complain if there is no default. So I
> always add a default.
We turn on -Wswitch-default
I'd like to turn on -Wswitch-enum
That generates a handful of warnings that I'm willing to fix.
But then Coverity will barf (DEADCODE) at all the defaults.
I think I'
Yo Hal!
On Sun, 05 Feb 2023 17:38:49 -0800
Hal Murray via devel wrote:
> 1439 default: {
> 1440 /* There should be a way for the compiler to
> check this. */ 1441 bool once =3D false;
> >>> CID 435753: Possible Control flow issues (DEADCODE)
> >>>
Yo Hal!
On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 18:44:29 -0700
Hal Murray wrote:
> > You should be able to login here:
> > https://scan.coverity.com/dashboard
>
> I get to a page where it wants me to Authorize Coverity Scan.
>
> What's that all about?
You are authorizing them to scna NTPsec directly from the G
On Wednesday, March 16, 2022, 06:51:56 PM PDT, Hal Murray via devel
wrote:
Thanks...
> You should be able to login here:
> https://scan.coverity.com/dashboard
I get to a page where it wants me to Authorize Coverity Scan.
What's that all about?
> Push the fix, and wait for Coverity to run t
Thanks...
> You should be able to login here:
> https://scan.coverity.com/dashboard
I get to a page where it wants me to Authorize Coverity Scan.
What's that all about?
> Push the fix, and wait for Coverity to run the checks again.
I'm missing a key step.
Coverity is on GitHub. I normally p
Yo Hal!
On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 16:01:17 -0700
Hal Murray wrote:
> I don't know my way around coverty.
You should be able to login here:
https://scan.coverity.com/dashboard
> Does this have a meaning?
> > ** CID 349664: Uninitialized variables (UNINIT)
349664 is the serial number of the defe
On Wednesday, March 16, 2022, 01:09:59 PM PDT, Gary E. Miller via devel
wrote:
Yo All!
New coverity found defect in NTPsec.
See below.
It can't really be new. Hal was the last person near there a year ago the 24th.
Either covertity is pushing more stuff or the noise floor lowered enough to
23 matches
Mail list logo
