On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Maarten Hoes
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> >
> >
> >> I was just trying to follow this LCOV Code Coverage guide:
> >>
> >> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Lcov
> >>
> >> which recommends to run configure '--with
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Wols Lists wrote:
>
> On 03/11/14 09:55, Maarten Hoes wrote:
> > I have no problem with editing the wiki. But before one can edit, one
> > must determine what to change it into: I havent determined yet what
> > would be a better way to filter out the unwanted non-li
On 03/11/14 09:55, Maarten Hoes wrote:
> I have no problem with editing the wiki. But before one can edit, one
> must determine what to change it into: I havent determined yet what
> would be a better way to filter out the unwanted non-libreoffice code
> from the report, other than running run conf
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>
>
>> I was just trying to follow this LCOV Code Coverage guide:
>>
>> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Lcov
>>
>> which recommends to run configure '--with-system-libs'
>
>
> The wiki might be a bit optimistic. It's a wiki. Edi
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Miklos Vajna
wrote:
>
> Is there a specific area in which you're interested wrt. code coverage?
>
Im just interested in determining what the current (total) state of
coverage is, and how much it changed compared to :
http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/lcov_reports/
Hi Maarten,
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 09:58:25AM +0100, Maarten Hoes
wrote:
> I was just trying to follow this LCOV Code Coverage guide:
>
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Lcov
>
> which recommends to run configure '--with-system-libs' in order to easily
> filter 'non-core' / no
> I was just trying to follow this LCOV Code Coverage guide:
>
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Lcov
>
> which recommends to run configure '--with-system-libs'
>
The wiki might be a bit optimistic. It's a wiki. Edit it.
--tml
___
LibreO
Hi,
I was just trying to follow this LCOV Code Coverage guide:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Lcov
which recommends to run configure '--with-system-libs' in order to easily
filter 'non-core' / non-libreoffice code from the resulting lcov report.
Perhaps this needs a different ap
I suspect there are very few systems, at least "stable" releases, where
--with-system-libs would work in a master build without any
--without-system-foo options at all. Perhaps we ought to mention that in
some wiki or in the configure.ac.
--tml
___
Libre
Hrm.
Looks like I spoke (just a little) too soon: there appears to be no
'--with-system-xulrunner' option.
Using '--with-system-npapi-headers=no' for the desired effect instead.
- Maarten.
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Maarten Hoes wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I did some searching, and the issue see
Hi,
I did some searching, and the issue seems to be with xulrunner. If I run
configure with '--with-system-xulrunner=no', the issue goes away. Im
running Fedora 21 and the distro provided version of xulrunner there is
33.0. I did some additional googling, and more people seem to be running
into a
Hi,
Im running into the following build failure (it looks like it only occurs
when when I run configure with the option '--with-system-libs'). Does
anyone have an idea what might be going on here ?
Thanks,
Maarten Hoes.
12 matches
Mail list logo