On 2013-07-01 07:14:23 -0700, David Fetter wrote: > > If we had a different set of tests, that would be a valid argument. But > > we don't, so it's not. And nobody has offered to write a feature to > > split our tests either.
> With utmost respect, this just isn't true. There is a "make coverage" > target that probably doesn't get enough exercise, but it's just the > kind of infrastructure you're describing. Uh? Isn't make coverage a target for collecting the generated coverage data? Afaik it itself does *NOT* depend on any checks being run. And it only does something sensible if --enable-coverage is passed to ./configure anyway. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
