Re: [fossil-dev] Code coverage experiment

On 2/4/2016 12:33 PM, Ross Berteig wrote: As an experiment, I decided to see how hard it would be to build fossil instrumented for code coverage and run the full test suite. Turns out it wasn't that hard to do, although it did require both configure and make to be invoked with special conditions.

[fossil-dev] Code coverage experiment

As an experiment, I decided to see how hard it would be to build fossil instrumented for code coverage and run the full test suite. Turns out it wasn't that hard to do, although it did require both configure and make to be invoked with special conditions. The result also ran a lot slower, but

Re: [fossil-dev] updated miniz.c

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Stephan Beal > wrote: > >> Interestingly, that repo "only" has 1.15, not the 1.16 i scrounged up >> (which i've since locally patched for a few portability problems). >> > > Latest commit 28f5066 >

Re: [fossil-dev] updated miniz.c

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > Interestingly, that repo "only" has 1.15, not the 1.16 i scrounged up > (which i've since locally patched for a few portability problems). > Latest commit 28f5066

Re: [fossil-dev] updated miniz.c

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Baruch Burstein wrote: > On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 5:59 PM, Stephan Beal > wrote: > >> Hi, all, >> >> The original miniz site was gcode and it's long since been turned off. i >> have been unable to find a current official home for it >> > > https://github.com/richge