> I have no understanding of Coccinelle. I do not understand what you
> are saying.
The application of a few scripts in the semantic patch language
can occasionally help to improve some software, can't it?
Now I'll try again to present more detailed source code analysis results
according to specif
On Sat, 25.07.15 08:11, SF Markus Elfring (elfr...@users.sourceforge.net) wrote:
I am sorry Markus, but at this point you are just wasting our time. Be
specific (i.e. by sending git patches, providing backtraces of
crashes, or actual bug reports), otherwise this is of no help. I will
now stop resp
> No, nothing needs more discussion or attention in the context of systemd.
I disagree here. - I would appreciate if return value ignorance can be still
reduced at more source code places.
Do you distinguish any update candidates which belong to a subsystem
in this software?
> None of the above
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 8:11 AM, SF Markus Elfring
wrote:
>> We accept contributions only in git-format-patch frmatted patches,
>> best via github PRs.
>
> The higher level patch formats I'm trying to make you aware of will also
> result in file changes which can be integrated by this content mana
> We accept contributions only in git-format-patch frmatted patches,
> best via github PRs.
The higher level patch formats I'm trying to make you aware of will also
result in file changes which can be integrated by this content management
interface depending on your general acceptance for correspo
On Fri, 24.07.15 18:15, SF Markus Elfring (elfr...@users.sourceforge.net) wrote:
> > Generally, please be specific, provide patches.
>
> I suggest to consider additional "patch formats" as a better preparation
> for software improvements.
We accept contributions only in git-format-patch frmatted
> I have no understanding of Coccinelle.
This software provides the tool "spatch" which lets you specify transformations
for C source code in a similar way you are used to already by the reuse
of unified context diffs.
http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/
I assume that you have eventually noticed specific
On Fri, 24.07.15 15:10, SF Markus Elfring (elfr...@users.sourceforge.net) wrote:
> An analysis script can point more source code places out for
> further considerations.
> Would you like to care for corresponding open issues?
We are making heavy use of Coverity already on a daily basis, I think
w
> We are regularly checking the systemd sources with coverity and the
> llvm/clang analyzer.
I hope that I may look also into a corresponding web interface.
https://scan.coverity.com/projects/350
I found a few update candidates by a web search.
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/644
An a
On Thu, 23.07.15 08:55, SF Markus Elfring (elfr...@users.sourceforge.net) wrote:
Heya,
> I would like to continue the clarification of open issues
> around a topic like "Completion of error handling".
> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/644
>
> I hope that the amount of unchecked return
Hello,
I would like to continue the clarification of open issues
around a topic like "Completion of error handling".
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/644
I hope that the amount of unchecked return values can be reduced
further in affected source files by the reuse of dedicated
software d
11 matches
Mail list logo
