No problem. I'm happy to go through the Coverity reports. Hopefully
I can at least do some research on Coverity's output by the time you
guys are ready to look at it.
- C
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Sergei Golubchik wrote:
> Hi, Christian!
>
> On Feb 07, Christian Convey wrote:
>> >
>> >>
Hi, Christian!
On Feb 07, Christian Convey wrote:
> >
> >> Is there some way I can map Coverity reports to individual developers,
> >> and then ask each of them to take a look at their portion of the Scan
> >> results?
> >
> > Sorry, but not now. All our developers (myself included) are completely
Hi Giacomo,
> Perhaps you can create a list of those minor issues and in the list we can
> take advantage of more developer, I'd like to fix some of them in next days.
Sure, no problem. I just added you as a user to that project. You
should get an email for completing your registration very soo
Hi Sergei,
> I'd suggest you to start looking at the issues and fix those that are
> simple, like, those you can fix in a few minutes. They should be in a
> majority anyway.
>
> For example, there were issues where va_end() was forgotten.
> Or where memcmp return value was casted to char.
> This i
Hi Christian,
Perhaps you can create a list of those minor issues and in the list we can
take advantage of more developer, I'd like to fix some of them in next days.
2013/2/7 Sergei Golubchik
> Hi, Christian!
>
> On Feb 07, Christian Convey wrote:
> > Thanks. So what would you suggest?
>
> I'
Hi, Christian!
On Feb 07, Christian Convey wrote:
> Thanks. So what would you suggest?
I'd suggest you to start looking at the issues and fix those that are
simple, like, those you can fix in a few minutes. They should be in a
majority anyway.
For example, there were issues where va_end() was f
Thanks. So what would you suggest?
Is there some way I can map Coverity reports to individual developers,
and then ask each of them to take a look at their portion of the Scan
results?
- Christian
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Sergei Golubchik wrote:
> Hi, Christian!
>
> On Feb 07, Christia
Hi, Christian!
On Feb 07, Christian Convey wrote:
> Hi Sergei
>
> > Usually there's a pattern, and many false positives fall under it.
> > Please create an account for me, and I'll see if we could quickly
> > discard many false positives.
>
> Done. If you don't receive an email from the Scan pr
Hi Sergei
> Usually there's a pattern, and many false positives fall under it.
> Please create an account for me, and I'll see if we could quickly
> discard many false positives.
Done. If you don't receive an email from the Scan project soon, let me know.
>
> No, I didn't mean that you need to
Hi, Christian!
On Feb 07, Christian Convey wrote:
> >
> > Okay, you can create an account for me. But it would be better if
> > you could find which of those defects are real.
>
> I'm perfectly content to follow the path which you consider to be the
> better one: me checking each individual issue
Hi Sergei,
> MySQL was under the Coverity Scan twice (at least twice - that's what
> I've personally was involved in). The first report found about 300
> defects, and about 200 of them were false positives, 50 of them were
> real, and others were not in the MySQL code. The second has found only
>
Hi Timour,
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 05:39:02PM +0200, Timour Katchaounov wrote:
>
> Sergey,
>
> Could you please review the following patch. The fix implements
> your suggestion from your previous review:
> https://lists.launchpad.net/maria-developers/msg04597.html
>
Ok to push.
> Timour
>
> -
Hi, Christian!
On Feb 06, Christian Convey wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> For those of you who missed it, I volunteered to try gettin MariaDB
> scanned as part of the Coverity Scan service. I just got the trunk
> scanned for the first time, and a lot of potential-problem reports
> came up. I did a spot
13 matches
Mail list logo
