Gcov support in Covoar

[Chris Johns]

> On 5 Jul 2018, at 5:20 am, Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018, 1:46 PM Vijay Kumar Banerjee <vijaykumar9597 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 4 July 2018 at 22:37, Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018, 3:06 AM Chris Johns <chrisj at rtems.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 4/7/18 5:55 pm, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote:
>>>> > On 4 July 2018 at 13:09, Chris Johns <chrisj at rtems.org
>>>> > <mailto:chrisj at rtems.org>> wrote:
>>>> > 
>>>> >     On 4/7/18 5:38 pm, Chris Johns wrote:
>>>> >     > On 4/7/18 4:52 pm, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote:
>>>> >     >>
>>>> >     >> I'm starting this thread for discussions on the gcov support 
>>>> >     >> in covoar.
>>>> >     >>
>>>> >     >> Current status is that the code in it (like in GcovData.cc) remained untouched 
>>>> >     >> for a long time and it had not been updated after the source tree reorganization
>>>> >     >> which is why it runs into segmentation
>>>> >     >> fault while trying to find the source files.
>>>> >     >>
>>>> >     >> Joel was suggesting to copy the file gcov-io.h from the gcc
>>>> >     >> source after a license discussion here.
>>>> >     > 
>>>> >     > What license the file's license?
>>>> > 
>>>> >     Sorry .. What is the file's license?
>>>> > 
>>>> > GPL version 3 
>>>> 
>>>> This license is not suitable.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> It has the runtime exception and is the only file that defines the format of gcno and (need to double-check) gcda file. It does not contaminate anything.
>>> 
>>> I don't see anyway to interpret gcno or write gcda data otherwise. 
>>> 
>>> How does llvm address this? Don't that have the same issue? 
>>> 
>> llvm defines it in GCOV.h file in llvm/ProfileData/ under the license 
>> it's mentioned there that it's distributed under University of Illinois Open Source License
>> https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/master/include/llvm/ProfileData/GCOV.h 
> 
> 
> That would be the preferred way to get this header. Is it technically acceptable?
> 
> Chris.. license acceptable to you?

Yes. Please avoid GPLv3 even with the exception. 

Thanks
Chris

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20180707/34628587/attachment-0002.html>