Re: make coverage

[Tim Rühsen]

On Donnerstag, 18. Mai 2017 19:29:18 CEST Bruno Haible wrote:
> Tim Rühsen wrote:
> > $ ./gnulib-tool --create-testdir --dir=../testdir1
> > $ cd ../testdir
> > $ ./configure CFLAGS="-g -coverage"
> > $ make clean && make coverage
> 
> I did
> $ ./gnulib-tool --create-testdir --dir=../testdir-all
> $ cd ../testdir-all
> $ ./configure CFLAGS="-ggdb --coverage"
> $ make coverage
> 
> and these tests pass:
> 
> PASS: test-fprintf-posix.sh
> PASS: test-fprintf-posix2.sh
> PASS: test-fprintf-posix3.sh
> ...
> PASS: test-printf-posix.sh
> PASS: test-printf-posix2.sh

I am on a different hardware, but same OS (Debian unstable) now,
same tests fail as before.

> This is on Ubuntu 16.04, with
> $ ulimit -s
> 8192

ulimit -s is the same here.

> > 7 failures are due to using system libunistring (Version
> > 0.9.6+really0.9.3-0.1) and can be avoided by ./configure
> > --with-included-libunistring.
> 
> Ugh. Looks like your distributor plays weird games with the libunistring
> shared library version.
> https://launchpad.net/debian/+source/libunistring/0.9.6+really0.9.3-0.1
> This happens if a distributor gives a higher .so version to a shared library
> than it really is.

Yes, this is ugly. Gave us some headaches at the libidn2 project.
Debian has a bug report pending from me and will likely fix it when freeze is 
over.

> What do you get if you change the value 5000000 in
> tests/test-fprintf-posix2.c to a larger or smaller value?

No change with 500000 (10x smaller).
Both succeed with 50000000 (10x higher).

With Best Regards, Tim

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.