From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31587 invoked by alias); 16 Jul 2002 21:00:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 31570 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2002 21:00:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cleanup.comdev.cc) (63.150.62.162) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Jul 2002 21:00:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 3148 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2002 21:00:56 -0000 Received: from leftfield.comdev.cc (HELO localhost.localdomain) (kevin@10.9.1.54) by cleanup.comdev.cc with SMTP; 16 Jul 2002 21:00:56 -0000 Subject: code coverage and profiling with gcc From: Kevin Kress To: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-TE+wn2h8/WggGT1/zFrH" Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 14:00:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1026853256.6723.37.camel@leftfield> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00155.txt.bz2 --=-TE+wn2h8/WggGT1/zFrH Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-length: 1670 I have been trying to get a rather large project to work with the -fprofile-arcs and -ftest-coverage flags. This project produces 2 binaries, the problem I am having is that only one of these files is producing ".da" files. Both a compile with -g and a few -W and -I flags and nothing else. When I run strings on the binary that does not produce ".da" files I find references to the .da files, so I am sure the flags are gettin passed during compilation. I am not able to recompile with a newer version of gcc (see the version info below) since there are syntax errors reported in newer versions and this code is not mine to do with as I please. I am not sure how to go about debugging this either, I have tried removing the directory structure that the ".da" files should be written into, which usually causes an error message to be shown, this does not occur on the problematic binary. What I am wondering is are there any know cases where the code coverage will not execute as expected? How should I go about debugging this (I have tried gdb and was unable to step into any useful functions)? report of version from "gcc -v" || "g++ -v" Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/egcs-2.91.66/specs gcc version egcs-2.91.66 19990314/Linux (egcs-1.1.2 release) Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance --Kevin Kress --=20 Kevin Kress (Software Engineer) COM DEV Broadband San Luis Obispo, CA Phone: 805-544-1089 Fax: 805-544-2055 GnuPG/PGP Key ID: 8A811ECC Fingerprint : D244 8D76 327D F7B8 DAE6 FF72 30F0 694B 8A81 1ECC See Keyserver: http://www.keyserver.net/en/findkey.html=20 (search for "Kevin Kress" or "0x8A811ECC")=20 --=-TE+wn2h8/WggGT1/zFrH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-length: 189 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA9NImIMPBpS4qBHswRAg5oAJ9JYe4zO6xV/ruMnGjonHSyxy5PgwCfeVGx z+j45MORwF/3WRt/Z9hG2nI= =G2Xj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-TE+wn2h8/WggGT1/zFrH--