Menu
▾
▴
cobertura-devel — General questions about using and developing Cobertura.
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2005 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(66) |
Apr
(29) |
May
(85) |
Jun
(66) |
Jul
(24) |
Aug
(139) |
Sep
(72) |
Oct
(26) |
Nov
(142) |
Dec
(34) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 |
Jan
(55) |
Feb
(72) |
Mar
(43) |
Apr
(60) |
May
(95) |
Jun
(22) |
Jul
(48) |
Aug
(17) |
Sep
(54) |
Oct
(30) |
Nov
(82) |
Dec
(17) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(23) |
Feb
(38) |
Mar
(46) |
Apr
(12) |
May
(77) |
Jun
(77) |
Jul
(94) |
Aug
(51) |
Sep
(38) |
Oct
(57) |
Nov
(39) |
Dec
(67) |
| 2008 |
Jan
(38) |
Feb
(56) |
Mar
(42) |
Apr
(46) |
May
(37) |
Jun
(43) |
Jul
(52) |
Aug
(22) |
Sep
(22) |
Oct
(34) |
Nov
(37) |
Dec
(29) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(27) |
Feb
(35) |
Mar
(67) |
Apr
(37) |
May
(31) |
Jun
(79) |
Jul
(71) |
Aug
(59) |
Sep
(31) |
Oct
(47) |
Nov
(36) |
Dec
(7) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(15) |
Feb
(87) |
Mar
(38) |
Apr
(33) |
May
(24) |
Jun
(47) |
Jul
(26) |
Aug
(28) |
Sep
(33) |
Oct
(13) |
Nov
(8) |
Dec
(36) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(32) |
Feb
(10) |
Mar
(29) |
Apr
(29) |
May
(17) |
Jun
(14) |
Jul
(33) |
Aug
(11) |
Sep
(7) |
Oct
(7) |
Nov
(6) |
Dec
(10) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(19) |
Feb
(12) |
Mar
(16) |
Apr
(6) |
May
(18) |
Jun
(18) |
Jul
(31) |
Aug
(25) |
Sep
|
Oct
(31) |
Nov
(21) |
Dec
(9) |
| 2013 |
Jan
(8) |
Feb
(16) |
Mar
(8) |
Apr
(7) |
May
(3) |
Jun
(29) |
Jul
(29) |
Aug
|
Sep
(7) |
Oct
(9) |
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(1) |
| 2014 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(4) |
Mar
|
Apr
(13) |
May
(8) |
Jun
(5) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(4) |
Sep
(4) |
Oct
(2) |
Nov
|
Dec
(2) |
| 2015 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
(2) |
Apr
|
May
(2) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2016 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(1) |
May
(1) |
Jun
(3) |
Jul
(3) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2017 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2018 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2025 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: John W. L. <Joh...@sa...> - 2011-05-13 18:36:40
|
Unfortunately, in February, I got pulled onto another project, and I had to drop Cobertura work for a while. I now have the OK to proceed with the release. I am going to start with deploying Piotr's latest changes onto our test servers. John From: Piotr Tabor [mailto:pio...@gm...] Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 4:24 PM To: cob...@li... Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Fwd: Cobertura 2.0/ignore trivial release date? Don't know why it was rejected. I'm not aware any release-blocking issues. John ? Piotr ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Joshua Watkins <jos...@ga...<mailto:jos...@ga...>> Date: Tue, May 10, 2011 at 2:51 PM Subject: Message Rejected - FW: [Cobertura-devel] Cobertura 2.0/ignore trivial release date? To: "cob...@li...<mailto:cob...@li...>" <cob...@li...<mailto:cob...@li...>> I think my message has been rejected in error. Below is the body of my message: John, Any more news on this? -----Original Message----- I hope the next release will happen no later than a month from now. Piotr's branch will very likely be merged into the trunk, so I would use his branch for any internal version you may create. His branch has been deployed on several of the test servers I maintain, and it is holding up very well. It is also noticeably faster. If there is enough interest, I can do a quick release of the trunk if a month is too long to wait. I'm not sure that would help you though since you will want to use the trunk after the merge. John -----Original Message----- From: Ximon Eighteen [mailto:ximon.eighteen@<mailto:ximon.eighteen@>...] Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2011 6:14 AM To: cobertura-devel@... Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Cobertura 2.0/ignore trivial release date? Good morning all, This is my first post to the list and so I have had a brief look through the list archives (as far back as June last year) for mail subjects which might relate to a new release of Cobertura but I have not found anything. My apologies if my question is already answered or this is not the correct place to ask it. I can see that the project is active, at least there are recent commits to the source repository, but I cannot find any information on when a new release of Cobertura might be expected. Specifically I want to use the accepted ignore trivla patch (http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3010530&group_id=130558&at id=720017<http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3010530&group_id=130558&at%0Aid=720017>). I have made my own local version of Cobertura and am considering deploying it to our company internal Nexus instance but with my companies groupId instead of net.sourceforge.cobertura (to avoid confusion as mine would not be an official release). I would also deploy a slightly modified version of the maven cobertura plugin which depends on my modified cobertura and passes through the ignore trivial command line flag, again with my own groupId. I thought I should ask here before proceeding in case a release including this feature is imminent or if you advise that I proceed differently. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Ximon On 10/05/2011 13:46, "cob...@li...<mailto:cob...@li...>" <cob...@li...<mailto:cob...@li...>> wrote: >cob...@li...<mailto:cob...@li...> -- Pozdrawiam, Piotr Tabor |
|
From: Piotr T. <pio...@gm...> - 2011-05-11 20:24:06
|
Don't know why it was rejected. I'm not aware any release-blocking issues. John ? Piotr ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Joshua Watkins <jos...@ga...> Date: Tue, May 10, 2011 at 2:51 PM Subject: Message Rejected - FW: [Cobertura-devel] Cobertura 2.0/ignore trivial release date? To: "cob...@li..." < cob...@li...> I think my message has been rejected in error. Below is the body of my message: John, Any more news on this? -----Original Message----- I hope the next release will happen no later than a month from now. Piotr's branch will very likely be merged into the trunk, so I would use his branch for any internal version you may create. His branch has been deployed on several of the test servers I maintain, and it is holding up very well. It is also noticeably faster. If there is enough interest, I can do a quick release of the trunk if a month is too long to wait. I'm not sure that would help you though since you will want to use the trunk after the merge. John -----Original Message----- From: Ximon Eighteen [mailto:ximon.eighteen@...] Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2011 6:14 AM To: cobertura-devel@... Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Cobertura 2.0/ignore trivial release date? Good morning all, This is my first post to the list and so I have had a brief look through the list archives (as far back as June last year) for mail subjects which might relate to a new release of Cobertura but I have not found anything. My apologies if my question is already answered or this is not the correct place to ask it. I can see that the project is active, at least there are recent commits to the source repository, but I cannot find any information on when a new release of Cobertura might be expected. Specifically I want to use the accepted ignore trivla patch (http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3010530&group_id=130558&at id=720017). I have made my own local version of Cobertura and am considering deploying it to our company internal Nexus instance but with my companies groupId instead of net.sourceforge.cobertura (to avoid confusion as mine would not be an official release). I would also deploy a slightly modified version of the maven cobertura plugin which depends on my modified cobertura and passes through the ignore trivial command line flag, again with my own groupId. I thought I should ask here before proceeding in case a release including this feature is imminent or if you advise that I proceed differently. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Ximon On 10/05/2011 13:46, "cob...@li..." <cob...@li...> wrote: >cob...@li... -- Pozdrawiam, Piotr Tabor |
|
From: John W. L. <Joh...@sa...> - 2011-05-09 19:15:34
|
I doubt it. The regular expressions used in Cobertura are pretty simple, and I don't think there is much to be gained in switching libraries. John -----Original Message----- From: Alan Chaney [mailto:al...@me...] Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 1:56 PM To: cob...@li... Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Jakarta ORO retired Hi I'm using cobertura 1.9.4.1. Originally I had a dependency upon jakarta oro, but this is now "retired". Are there plans to move to a different library? Regards Alan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution. http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd _______________________________________________ Cobertura-devel mailing list Cob...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel |
|
From: Alan C. <al...@me...> - 2011-05-09 18:55:42
|
Hi I'm using cobertura 1.9.4.1. Originally I had a dependency upon jakarta oro, but this is now "retired". Are there plans to move to a different library? Regards Alan |
|
From: Code C. <cc...@ya...> - 2011-05-06 05:28:42
|
Hi,
I have deploy my application instrumented war file to tomcat5.5.2. I ran some manual tests against the application. But I don't see cobertura.ser file size increase in the {tomcat.home}/bin folder. Also when I generate report, I see no coverage.
Am i missing anything?. Please help me.
Thanks,
Parthu |
|
From: DOS R. M. L. F. (L. FELIPE)
<lui...@al...> - 2011-05-04 08:11:01
|
Hello, I'm using QF-Test as part of my test suit in a Hudson Project to have a coverage report using COBERTURA-MAVEN plugin. In this project, I launch 2 different *.qft files which execute instrumented code created by cobertura. The problem is that I obtain a coverage reporting only the last *qft file executed in sequence. It seems cobertura.ser used to generate these reports it's being deleted in every QFTest execution instead of updating coverage information between both files. Is there any way I could configure or QFTest or Maven to automatically update cobertura.ser ?? Thanks in advance, Luiz Felipe Maximiano Cordialement, Luiz Felipe Maximiano |
|
From: Code C. <cc...@ya...> - 2011-05-02 17:34:59
|
Hi John, I tried steps you specified. But still I coundn't instrument a war file. Did it work for you. C:\temp\cobertura-1.9.4.1>cobertura-instrument.bat --basedir C:\temp\codecoverag e messaging.war Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -agentlib:jvmhook Picked up _JAVA_OPTIONS: -Xrunjvmhook -Xbootclasspath/a:C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\ bin\JAVA_S~1\classes;C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\bin\JAVA_S~1\classes\jasmine.jar Cobertura 1.9.4.1 - GNU GPL License (NO WARRANTY) - See COPYRIGHT file Cobertura: Loaded information on 0 classes. Instrumenting 1 file Cobertura: Saved information on 0 classes. Instrument time: 5398ms C:\temp\codecoverage>c:\temp\cobertura-1.9.4.1\cobertura-instrument.bat --basedi r C:\temp\codecoverage --includeClasses 'com.*' messaging.war Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -agentlib:jvmhook Picked up _JAVA_OPTIONS: -Xrunjvmhook -Xbootclasspath/a:C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\ bin\JAVA_S~1\classes;C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\bin\JAVA_S~1\classes\jasmine.jar Cobertura 1.9.4.1 - GNU GPL License (NO WARRANTY) - See COPYRIGHT file Cobertura: Loaded information on 0 classes. Instrumenting 1 file Cobertura: Saved information on 0 classes. Instrument time: 17327ms C:\temp\codecoverage>c:\temp\cobertura-1.9.4.1\cobertura-instrument.bat -basedir C:\temp\codecoverage messaging.war From: John W. Lewis <Joh...@sa...> To: Code Code <cc...@ya...>; Fabien Bataille <fba...@gm...> Cc: "cob...@li..." <cob...@li...> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 1:30 PM Subject: RE: [Cobertura-devel] Instrumenting war file using command line Are you both trying to do this at the command line? If so, then here are the instructions. Since you are trying to instrument one file, you will want to use the --basedir to specify the directory the war is in. Then, you will only need to end the command with the name of the war. Next, since Cobertura would instrument every jar in the war, and you probably would not want that since all your dependencies would end up in the report, the --includeClasses parameter is required. So, you want something like: c:\temp\cobertura-1.9.4.1\cobertura-instrument.bat --basedir c:\temp\codecoverage --includeClasses ‘com.mypackage.*’ provision.war The war will be instrumented in place. Any class of any jar that is in com.mypackage will be instrumented. John From:Code Code [mailto:cc...@ya...] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 1:12 PM To: Fabien Bataille Cc: cob...@li... Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Instrumenting war file using command line Thanks for the info. I was reading on the http://cobertura.sourceforge.net/anttaskreference.html website. I though we can also instrument a war file. "For example, if you have a war file which contains a jar file at WEB-INF/lib, Cobertura will extract the war, instrument the classes within the jar, then build a new war containing the instrumented jar. " From:Fabien Bataille <fba...@gm...> To: Code Code <cc...@ya...> Cc: "cob...@li..." <cob...@li...> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 12:31 AM Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Instrumenting war file using command line I am in the same case as you, what I do is first to extract the content of the war file in a temporary directory, then instrument all extracted classes, and last recreating the war (be sure to I don't think there is any existing ant target for that in the Cobertura delivery. 2011/4/28 Code Code <cc...@ya...> Hi, I am trying to instrumenting a war file. It doen't instrument all the classes in the war file. I see only class getting instrumented. C:\temp\codecoverage>c:\temp\cobertura-1.9.4.1\cobertura-instrument.bat c:\temp\codecoverage\provision.war Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -agentlib:jvmhook Picked up _JAVA_OPTIONS: -Xrunjvmhook -Xbootclasspath/a:C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\ bin\JAVA_S~1\classes;C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\bin\JAVA_S~1\classes\jasmine.jar Cobertura 1.9.4.1 - GNU GPL License (NO WARRANTY) - See COPYRIGHT file Cobertura: Loaded information on 1 classes. Instrumenting 1 file Am I doing anything wrong. Could you suggest me how to instrument a war file using commandline. Thanks, Parthu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution. http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd _______________________________________________ Cobertura-devel mailing list Cob...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel |
|
From: karl f. <klj...@ho...> - 2011-04-28 22:44:08
|
John, Thanks. I now know what I did wrong. I delete the .ser file generated by the call to cobertura-instrument.sh, then ran my test. When I run cobertura-report.sh on the .ser file created by the test it shows Branch Coverage as NA. If I don't delete the .ser file things work fine. m KarlFrom: Joh...@sa... To: klj...@ho...; cob...@li... Subject: RE: [Cobertura-devel] Branch Coverage Showing as NA Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 20:36:25 +0000 That is odd behavior. I am not sure what is going on. Since you said your build tool puts the source and classes in different directories, you would have cobertura-instrument point to the classes and have cobertura-report point to the source. Can I see your commands? John From: karl francis [mailto:klj...@ho...] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 11:07 AM To: cob...@li... Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Branch Coverage Showing as NA When I instrument the code and the .java file and .class file are in the same directory I get branch coverage numbers in the report. When I instrument the code and the .java file is NOT available, I don't get branch coverage numbers in the report. My build tool puts the .class files in a different directory that the .java files. Does cobertura-instrument.sh support specifying a source directory? Why is the source needed for branch coverage numbers to be generated? Thanks, Karl |
|
From: John W. L. <Joh...@sa...> - 2011-04-28 20:36:35
|
That is odd behavior. I am not sure what is going on. Since you said your build tool puts the source and classes in different directories, you would have cobertura-instrument point to the classes and have cobertura-report point to the source. Can I see your commands? John From: karl francis [mailto:klj...@ho...] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 11:07 AM To: cob...@li... Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Branch Coverage Showing as NA When I instrument the code and the .java file and .class file are in the same directory I get branch coverage numbers in the report. When I instrument the code and the .java file is NOT available, I don't get branch coverage numbers in the report. My build tool puts the .class files in a different directory that the .java files. Does cobertura-instrument.sh support specifying a source directory? Why is the source needed for branch coverage numbers to be generated? Thanks, Karl |
|
From: John W. L. <Joh...@sa...> - 2011-04-28 20:30:38
|
Are you both trying to do this at the command line? If so, then here are the instructions. Since you are trying to instrument one file, you will want to use the --basedir to specify the directory the war is in. Then, you will only need to end the command with the name of the war. Next, since Cobertura would instrument every jar in the war, and you probably would not want that since all your dependencies would end up in the report, the --includeClasses parameter is required. So, you want something like: c:\temp\cobertura-1.9.4.1\cobertura-instrument.bat --basedir c:\temp\codecoverage --includeClasses 'com.mypackage.*' provision.war The war will be instrumented in place. Any class of any jar that is in com.mypackage will be instrumented. John From: Code Code [mailto:cc...@ya...] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 1:12 PM To: Fabien Bataille Cc: cob...@li... Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Instrumenting war file using command line Thanks for the info. I was reading on the http://cobertura.sourceforge.net/anttaskreference.html website. I though we can also instrument a war file. "For example, if you have a war file which contains a jar file at WEB-INF/lib, Cobertura will extract the war, instrument the classes within the jar, then build a new war containing the instrumented jar. " From: Fabien Bataille <fba...@gm...> To: Code Code <cc...@ya...> Cc: "cob...@li..." <cob...@li...> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 12:31 AM Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Instrumenting war file using command line I am in the same case as you, what I do is first to extract the content of the war file in a temporary directory, then instrument all extracted classes, and last recreating the war (be sure to I don't think there is any existing ant target for that in the Cobertura delivery. 2011/4/28 Code Code <cc...@ya...<mailto:cc...@ya...>> Hi, I am trying to instrumenting a war file. It doen't instrument all the classes in the war file. I see only class getting instrumented. C:\temp\codecoverage>c:\temp\cobertura-1.9.4.1\cobertura-instrument.bat c:\temp\codecoverage\provision.war Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -agentlib:jvmhook Picked up _JAVA_OPTIONS: -Xrunjvmhook -Xbootclasspath/a:C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\ bin\JAVA_S~1\classes;C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\bin\JAVA_S~1\classes\jasmine.jar Cobertura 1.9.4.1 - GNU GPL License (NO WARRANTY) - See COPYRIGHT file Cobertura: Loaded information on 1 classes. Instrumenting 1 file Am I doing anything wrong. Could you suggest me how to instrument a war file using commandline. Thanks, Parthu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution. http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd _______________________________________________ Cobertura-devel mailing list Cob...@li...<mailto:Cob...@li...> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel |
|
From: Code C. <cc...@ya...> - 2011-04-28 17:12:32
|
Thanks for the info. I was reading on the http://cobertura.sourceforge.net/anttaskreference.html website. I though we can also instrument a war file. "For example, if you have a war file which contains a jar file at WEB-INF/lib, Cobertura will extract the war, instrument the classes within the jar, then build a new war containing the instrumented jar. " From: Fabien Bataille <fba...@gm...> To: Code Code <cc...@ya...> Cc: "cob...@li..." <cob...@li...> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 12:31 AM Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Instrumenting war file using command line I am in the same case as you, what I do is first to extract the content of the war file in a temporary directory, then instrument all extracted classes, and last recreating the war (be sure to I don't think there is any existing ant target for that in the Cobertura delivery. 2011/4/28 Code Code <cc...@ya...> Hi, >I am trying to instrumenting a war file. It doen't instrument all the classes in the war file. I see only class getting instrumented. > >C:\temp\codecoverage>c:\temp\cobertura-1.9.4.1\cobertura-instrument.bat c:\temp\codecoverage\provision.war >Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -agentlib:jvmhook >Picked up _JAVA_OPTIONS: -Xrunjvmhook -Xbootclasspath/a:C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\ >bin\JAVA_S~1\classes;C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\bin\JAVA_S~1\classes\jasmine.jar >Cobertura 1.9.4.1 - GNU GPL License (NO WARRANTY) - See COPYRIGHT file >Cobertura: Loaded information on 1 classes. >Instrumenting 1 file > >Am I doing anything wrong. Could you suggest me how to instrument a war file using commandline. > >Thanks, >Parthu >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software >The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network >management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial >acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution. >http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd >_______________________________________________ >Cobertura-devel mailing list >Cob...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel > > |
|
From: lokendra s. <lok...@ya...> - 2011-04-28 15:18:09
|
Thanks John. It is working as suggested. --- On Tue, 26/4/11, John W. Lewis <Joh...@sa...> wrote: From: John W. Lewis <Joh...@sa...> Subject: RE: [Cobertura-devel] Cobertura “unable to locate file” problem To: "lokendra singh" <lok...@ya...>, "cob...@li..." <cob...@li...>, "fabien bataille" <fab...@al...> Date: Tuesday, 26 April, 2011, 8:22 AM The documentation for basedir says, “This should only be used if you want to include only a few specific files underneath a source tree and exclude all other files.” I think this is not what you want. So, remove the basedir and put what you have after basedir at the end of the command: cobertura-report.sh --format html --datafile $COBERTURA_HOME/core/emscore.ser --destination $REPORT_DIR $COBERTURA_HOME/core/src From: lokendra singh [mailto:lok...@ya...] Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 5:28 AM To: cob...@li...; fabien bataille Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Cobertura “unable to locate file” problem I tried to use --destination but no luck. Can anyone please help here? --- On Mon, 11/4/11, fabien bataille <fab...@al...> wrote: From: fabien bataille <fab...@al...> Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Cobertura “unable to locate file” problem To: cob...@li... Date: Monday, 11 April, 2011, 1:02 AM Hi, I think you should try to use --destination for the source directory. Fabien On 04/11/2011 08:03 AM, lokendra singh wrote: Hi, Please help me to understand what is wrong here? I am using cobertura 1.9.4.1 for Java Code Coverage. I want to attache the source file with HTML report, I am generating report using the below command cobertura-report.sh --format html --datafile $COBERTURA_HOME/core/emscore.ser --basedir $COBERTURA_HOME/core/src --destination $REPORT_DIR HTML report generated successfully. Where I click on the file name in HTML report, it is giving the below error: "Unable to locate com/airvana/serverImpl/ObjectDao.java. Have you specified the source directory?" However I have the java source file at $COBERTURA_HOME/core/src/com/airvana/serverImpl/ObjectDao.java Thanks in advance. Lokendra -- Fabien Bataille CTO/ASR "Junior" Scrum Master Route de Villejust F-91620 Nozay Tel:+33 130772750 -----Inline Attachment Follows----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Xperia(TM) PLAY It's a major breakthrough. An authentic gaming smartphone on the nation's most reliable network. And it wants your games. http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-sfdev -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ Cobertura-devel mailing list Cob...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel |
|
From: karl f. <klj...@ho...> - 2011-04-28 15:07:22
|
When I instrument the code and the .java file and .class file are in the same directory I get branch coverage numbers in the report.When I instrument the code and the .java file is NOT available, I don't get branch coverage numbers in the report. My build tool puts the .class files in a different directory that the .java files. Does cobertura-instrument.sh support specifying a source directory? Why is the source needed for branch coverage numbers to be generated? Thanks, Karl |
|
From: Fabien B. <fba...@gm...> - 2011-04-28 07:31:46
|
I am in the same case as you, what I do is first to extract the content of the war file in a temporary directory, then instrument all extracted classes, and last recreating the war (be sure to I don't think there is any existing ant target for that in the Cobertura delivery. 2011/4/28 Code Code <cc...@ya...> > Hi, > I am trying to instrumenting a war file. It doen't instrument all the > classes in the war file. I see only class getting instrumented. > > C:\temp\codecoverage>c:\temp\cobertura-1.9.4.1\cobertura-instrument.bat > c:\temp\codecoverage\provision.war > Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -agentlib:jvmhook > Picked up _JAVA_OPTIONS: -Xrunjvmhook > -Xbootclasspath/a:C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\ > > bin\JAVA_S~1\classes;C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\bin\JAVA_S~1\classes\jasmine.jar > Cobertura 1.9.4.1 - GNU GPL License (NO WARRANTY) - See COPYRIGHT file > Cobertura: Loaded information on 1 classes. > Instrumenting 1 file > > Am I doing anything wrong. Could you suggest me how to instrument a war > file using commandline. > > Thanks, > Parthu > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software > The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network > management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial > acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd > _______________________________________________ > Cobertura-devel mailing list > Cob...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel > > |
|
From: Code C. <cc...@ya...> - 2011-04-27 23:41:04
|
Hi, I am trying to instrumenting a war file. It doen't instrument all the classes in the war file. I see only class getting instrumented. C:\temp\codecoverage>c:\temp\cobertura-1.9.4.1\cobertura-instrument.bat c:\temp\codecoverage\provision.war Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -agentlib:jvmhook Picked up _JAVA_OPTIONS: -Xrunjvmhook -Xbootclasspath/a:C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\ bin\JAVA_S~1\classes;C:\PROGRA~1\HP\QUICKT~1\bin\JAVA_S~1\classes\jasmine.jar Cobertura 1.9.4.1 - GNU GPL License (NO WARRANTY) - See COPYRIGHT file Cobertura: Loaded information on 1 classes. Instrumenting 1 file Am I doing anything wrong. Could you suggest me how to instrument a war file using commandline. Thanks, Parthu |
|
From: John W. L. <Joh...@sa...> - 2011-04-26 15:22:18
|
The documentation for basedir says, “This should only be used if you want to include only a few specific files underneath a source tree and exclude all other files.” I think this is not what you want. So, remove the basedir and put what you have after basedir at the end of the command: cobertura-report.sh --format html --datafile $COBERTURA_HOME/core/emscore.ser --destination $REPORT_DIR $COBERTURA_HOME/core/src From: lokendra singh [mailto:lok...@ya...] Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 5:28 AM To: cob...@li...; fabien bataille Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Cobertura “unable to locate file” problem I tried to use --destination but no luck. Can anyone please help here? --- On Mon, 11/4/11, fabien bataille <fab...@al...<mailto:fab...@al...>> wrote: From: fabien bataille <fab...@al...<mailto:fab...@al...>> Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Cobertura “unable to locate file” problem To: cob...@li...<mailto:cob...@li...> Date: Monday, 11 April, 2011, 1:02 AM Hi, I think you should try to use --destination for the source directory. Fabien On 04/11/2011 08:03 AM, lokendra singh wrote: Hi, Please help me to understand what is wrong here? I am using cobertura 1.9.4.1 for Java Code Coverage. I want to attache the source file with HTML report, I am generating report using the below command cobertura-report.sh --format html --datafile $COBERTURA_HOME/core/emscore.ser --basedir $COBERTURA_HOME/core/src --destination $REPORT_DIR HTML report generated successfully. Where I click on the file name in HTML report, it is giving the below error: "Unable to locate com/airvana/serverImpl/ObjectDao.java. Have you specified the source directory?" However I have the java source file at $COBERTURA_HOME/core/src/com/airvana/serverImpl/ObjectDao.java Thanks in advance. Lokendra -- Fabien Bataille CTO/ASR "Junior" Scrum Master Route de Villejust F-91620 Nozay Tel:+33 130772750 -----Inline Attachment Follows----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Xperia(TM) PLAY It's a major breakthrough. An authentic gaming smartphone on the nation's most reliable network. And it wants your games. http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-sfdev -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ Cobertura-devel mailing list Cob...@li...</mc/compose?to=Cob...@li...> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel |
|
From: lokendra s. <lok...@ya...> - 2011-04-26 09:27:40
|
I tried to use --destination but no luck. Can anyone please help here?
--- On Mon, 11/4/11, fabien bataille <fab...@al...> wrote:
From: fabien bataille <fab...@al...>
Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Cobertura “unable to locate file” problem
To: cob...@li...
Date: Monday, 11 April, 2011, 1:02 AM
Hi,
I think you should try to use --destination for the source
directory.
Fabien
On 04/11/2011 08:03 AM, lokendra singh wrote:
Hi,
Please help me to understand what is
wrong here?
I am using cobertura 1.9.4.1 for Java
Code Coverage. I want to attache the
source file with HTML report, I am
generating report using the below command
cobertura-report.sh --format html
--datafile
$COBERTURA_HOME/core/emscore.ser --basedir
$COBERTURA_HOME/core/src
--destination $REPORT_DIR
HTML report generated successfully. Where
I click on the file name in HTML report,
it is giving the below error:
"Unable to locate
com/airvana/serverImpl/ObjectDao.java.
Have you specified the source directory?"
However I have the java source file at
$COBERTURA_HOME/core/src/com/airvana/serverImpl/ObjectDao.java
Thanks in advance.
Lokendra
--
Fabien Bataille
CTO/ASR
"Junior" Scrum Master
Route de Villejust
F-91620 Nozay
Tel:+33 130772750
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xperia(TM) PLAY
It's a major breakthrough. An authentic gaming
smartphone on the nation's most reliable network.
And it wants your games.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-sfdev
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Cobertura-devel mailing list
Cob...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cobertura-devel
|
|
From: Benson M. <bim...@gm...> - 2011-04-22 21:28:07
|
Let's see. That's the right mailing list: dev...@mo... should subscribe you. If it doesn't work, you'll have to contact codehaus support. That's the web page under discussion. I think some of the confusion here about 'ant' was my attempt to guess how the page got to be the way it is. Now that you folks have explained, I'm less confused. Here's how I see things. The bottom line is that I, and others at Codehaus, see no legal difficulty with an ant task or a maven plugin, or anything else of the kind, just calling the cobertura API -- any part of that API -- and being licensed however the author wants to license it. Credible legal experts have exploded the notion of classpath contamination. A Java program that was compiled with the cobertura jar in the compiler's clutches is not a derived work of the source of cobertura. So, we've decided to go cheerfully ahead maintaining the maven plugin without regard to the distinction between the ant tasks and the not-the-ant-tasks. If the jcoverage people come after us with torches and pitchforks, we'll have to deal with the results then. The worst outcome is that they'd insist that the maven plugin become GPL, and then it would have to move to github. Not the end of the world. FWIW, The notion that ant and GPL are incompatible in the sense that would effect a user of ant or maven is just plain wrong. Nothing about the AL prevents someone from using a GPL ant task with ant, and nothing about the GPL does, either. Emphasis here on *using*. If someone created some body of code that incorporated both, more complexity would ensue. thanks, benson |
|
From: John W. L. <Joh...@sa...> - 2011-04-22 21:11:24
|
I am certainly not an expert on licensing, but I am generally happy to work with the maven plugin developers if they would like to see the web page on licensing changed. There has never been an attempt to "require the use of ant" and the web page should not convey that. By the way, I do not see the phrase "use of ant" on the page. Are we talking about this one: http://cobertura.sourceforge.net/license.html? Anyway, the way I see it is that the web page is generally for information only. The only thing of legal importance is the license that is in the code, but I could be wrong. It is true that the packages with ant in their name have source files that have the Apache license. All other packages have GPL'ed code. Generally, the history as I know it is this. Cobertura was forked by Mark Doliner who got a copy of the public version of JCoverage. Most of the code was GPL'ed except for the code related to the ant tasks. That code had to be Apache licensed since it was to run in Ant. Since Apache and the GPL are not compatible, it appears the JCoverage team attempted to get around that by having the ant tasks exec another process to execute the GPL'ed code. It sounds to me that Benson's opinion is that the JCoverage team could have GPL'ed all the code, and that there is nothing in the Apache license that prohibits an ant task to be GPL'ed. I don't know the answer. Mark made a request to JCoverage to change their license, but they were unwilling to change it. So, we are stuck with the GPL. They are the only ones that would come after Maven developers for copyright infringement. It would certainly not be Cobertura developers. The content of the current web page was written by Mark. I can ask Mark to be sure, but I think the intention of that page was to reassure users of Cobertura that their use of Cobertura was not going to put them at risk of having to GPL their own code. I think the idea is that people are more comfortable with the Apache license, but there was no intent to force them to use Apache or Ant. I am happy to hear that the maven plugin development goes on. I recently have not had any luck trying to subscribe to the mailing lists. I was attempting to subscribe to them due to Cobertura users mentioning having similar problems. I was trying to use this page: http://mojo.codehaus.org/cobertura-maven-plugin/mail-lists.html. Please let me know if that was wrong. John From: Piotr Tabor [mailto:pi...@ta...] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 5:49 AM To: cob...@li...; Benson Margulies Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Fwd: Licensing I'm sorry - I've responded directly to Benson, and it couldn't help in getting a comment from John. Piotr ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Piotr Tabor <pi...@ta...<mailto:pi...@ta...>> Date: Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Licensing To: Benson Margulies <bim...@gm...<mailto:bim...@gm...>> On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Benson Margulies <bim...@gm...<mailto:bim...@gm...>> wrote: Piotr, I see your dilemma. You don't have all the copyright holders at hand, so you're stuck with the license as it is. I do have a bit of an idea for you. Let's distinguish the license from the interpretation of the license. +1 from me. Let's make License page that says only: The Cobertura ant tasks (list of packages) are licensed under the Apache Software License, Version 1.1. The rest of Cobertura is licensed under the GNU General Public License, Version 2.0. See below for detailed explanations. We can move the rest to License FAQ with a comment that important is a License and here are only hints how to be 99% safe. What do you think John ? Ignoring (for the moment) the confusing AL-for-ant business, what you have is code under the GPL. However, most of the text on your licensing page is an \interpretation/ of the GPL. In my view, you could remove all of that and replace it with, more or less, "the source code of Cobertura is licensed under the GPL version 2.0". Really, nothing about the GPL forces you to publish that stuff about exec-ing additional jvms. There are people out there who think that the GPL can be enforced to impose restrictions like that, and other people who don't. I don't think you'd be at any risk of misleading anyone if you got rid of it. Of course, you can leave the AL grant on the page as well, but I wonder if you have documentation that all of the copyright holders approved it? The issue being that since that grant isn't written in terms of specific source files, it seems to either apply to all of the code or none of the code. If it applies to all of the code, that there are those who would say that the copyright holders granted an AL 1.1 licence to the whole thing if they granted anything at all. I thought about granting "only code that I have written from a scratch" to a new project. But I would need other people that want to work on the project. I don't have enough time to do it myself, and I don't think that bigger fragmentation is a good idea. I could write more about the legal issues at work here, but I hate to waste your time. In purely practical terms, it appears that the Codehaus people have decided that they are willing to operate by more or less ignoring the interpretative verbiage and just looking at the GPL and how maven works. So we can keep the plugin in Codehaus and stop being all tangled up with the 'ant' aspect of things. Thanks for pointing this out. Piotr -- Pozdrawiam, Piotr Tabor |
|
From: Fabien B. <fba...@gm...> - 2011-04-20 14:40:12
|
Hi,
With Instrumentation like the following:
java -cp $CLPATH -Xmx512M net.sourceforge.cobertura.instrument.Main
--includeClasses "com.toto.*" --includeClasses "com.titi.*" --includeClasses
"com.tata.*" $1
I get a coverage.xml report: like the following:
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<coverage line-rate="0.9993529751588677" branch-rate="1.0"
lines-covered="43247" lines-valid="43275" branches-covered="0"
branches-valid="0" complexity="0.0" version="1.10-svn"
timestamp="1302599755782">
<sources>
<source>com.toto.*</source>
*<source>--includeClasses</source> <---- It
seems that the second --includeClasses in the instrumentation is taken as a
class source*
<source>com.titi.*</source>
<source>com.tata.*</source>
</sources>
....
?>
Fabien
|
|
From: John W. L. <Joh...@sa...> - 2011-04-18 10:30:57
|
Cobertura supports it. File locks are used to make sure the cobertura.ser file is updated properly by both JVM's. From: Fabien Bataille [mailto:fba...@gm...] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 5:02 AM To: cobertura-devel Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Concurrent access to instrumentation data Hi, Does Cobertura support the following architecture: 2 different JVM using same instrumented code jars. Is the result in Cobertura.ser correct or may it be corrupted for instance when the first JVM stops, and then the second ? Cheers, FB |
|
From: Fabien B. <fba...@gm...> - 2011-04-18 09:02:17
|
Hi, Does Cobertura support the following architecture: 2 different JVM using same instrumented code jars. Is the result in Cobertura.ser correct or may it be corrupted for instance when the first JVM stops, and then the second ? Cheers, FB |
|
From: John W. L. <Joh...@sa...> - 2011-04-15 10:13:24
|
I did not realize you had asked me directly. I'll try to look closely at the issue today. From: Piotr Tabor [mailto:pi...@ta...] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 5:49 AM To: cob...@li...; Benson Margulies Subject: [Cobertura-devel] Fwd: Licensing I'm sorry - I've responded directly to Benson, and it couldn't help in getting a comment from John. Piotr ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Piotr Tabor <pi...@ta...<mailto:pi...@ta...>> Date: Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Licensing To: Benson Margulies <bim...@gm...<mailto:bim...@gm...>> On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Benson Margulies <bim...@gm...<mailto:bim...@gm...>> wrote: Piotr, I see your dilemma. You don't have all the copyright holders at hand, so you're stuck with the license as it is. I do have a bit of an idea for you. Let's distinguish the license from the interpretation of the license. +1 from me. Let's make License page that says only: The Cobertura ant tasks (list of packages) are licensed under the Apache Software License, Version 1.1. The rest of Cobertura is licensed under the GNU General Public License, Version 2.0. See below for detailed explanations. We can move the rest to License FAQ with a comment that important is a License and here are only hints how to be 99% safe. What do you think John ? Ignoring (for the moment) the confusing AL-for-ant business, what you have is code under the GPL. However, most of the text on your licensing page is an \interpretation/ of the GPL. In my view, you could remove all of that and replace it with, more or less, "the source code of Cobertura is licensed under the GPL version 2.0". Really, nothing about the GPL forces you to publish that stuff about exec-ing additional jvms. There are people out there who think that the GPL can be enforced to impose restrictions like that, and other people who don't. I don't think you'd be at any risk of misleading anyone if you got rid of it. Of course, you can leave the AL grant on the page as well, but I wonder if you have documentation that all of the copyright holders approved it? The issue being that since that grant isn't written in terms of specific source files, it seems to either apply to all of the code or none of the code. If it applies to all of the code, that there are those who would say that the copyright holders granted an AL 1.1 licence to the whole thing if they granted anything at all. I thought about granting "only code that I have written from a scratch" to a new project. But I would need other people that want to work on the project. I don't have enough time to do it myself, and I don't think that bigger fragmentation is a good idea. I could write more about the legal issues at work here, but I hate to waste your time. In purely practical terms, it appears that the Codehaus people have decided that they are willing to operate by more or less ignoring the interpretative verbiage and just looking at the GPL and how maven works. So we can keep the plugin in Codehaus and stop being all tangled up with the 'ant' aspect of things. Thanks for pointing this out. Piotr -- Pozdrawiam, Piotr Tabor |
|
From: Piotr T. <pi...@ta...> - 2011-04-15 09:48:55
|
I'm sorry - I've responded directly to Benson, and it couldn't help in getting a comment from John. Piotr ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Piotr Tabor <pi...@ta...> Date: Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM Subject: Re: [Cobertura-devel] Licensing To: Benson Margulies <bim...@gm...> On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Benson Margulies <bim...@gm...>wrote: > Piotr, > > I see your dilemma. You don't have all the copyright holders at hand, > so you're stuck with the license as it is. > > I do have a bit of an idea for you. > > Let's distinguish the license from the interpretation of the license. > +1 from me. Let's make License page that says only: The Cobertura ant tasks (list of packages) are licensed under the Apache Software License, Version 1.1. The rest of Cobertura is licensed under the GNU General Public License, Version 2.0. See below for detailed explanations. We can move the rest to License FAQ with a comment that important is a License and here are only hints how to be 99% safe. What do you think John ? > > Ignoring (for the moment) the confusing AL-for-ant business, what you > have is code under the GPL. However, most of the text on your > licensing page is an \interpretation/ of the GPL. In my view, you > could remove all of that and replace it with, more or less, "the > source code of Cobertura is licensed under the GPL version 2.0". > > Really, nothing about the GPL forces you to publish that stuff about > exec-ing additional jvms. There are people out there who think that > the GPL can be enforced to impose restrictions like that, and other > people who don't. I don't think you'd be at any risk of misleading > anyone if you got rid of it. > > Of course, you can leave the AL grant on the page as well, but I > wonder if you have documentation that all of the copyright holders > approved it? The issue being that since that grant isn't written in > terms of specific source files, it seems to either apply to all of the > code or none of the code. If it applies to all of the code, that there > are those who would say that the copyright holders granted an AL 1.1 > licence to the whole thing if they granted anything at all. > I thought about granting "only code that I have written from a scratch" to a new project. But I would need other people that want to work on the project. I don't have enough time to do it myself, and I don't think that bigger fragmentation is a good idea. > I could write more about the legal issues at work here, but I hate to > waste your time. > > In purely practical terms, it appears that the Codehaus people have > decided that they are willing to operate by more or less ignoring the > interpretative verbiage and just looking at the GPL and how maven > works. So we can keep the plugin in Codehaus and stop being all > tangled up with the 'ant' aspect of things. > > Thanks for pointing this out. Piotr -- Pozdrawiam, Piotr Tabor |
|
From: Fabien B. <fba...@gm...> - 2011-04-12 13:00:27
|
I am using the cobertura.property to indicate where is the cobertura.ser file, and cobertura traces added in ConfigurationUtil indicate that this is taken into account by Cobertura. More over there is only one cobertura.ser file in the path and this is the one pointed to by the cobertura.property. Is it safe in this case to keep a "cache" of instrumented jars ? On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:51 PM, John W. Lewis <Joh...@sa...> wrote: > > > That is almost certainly a case where the process is not being pointed to > the cobertura.ser file that was created during instrumentation. Either the > working directory of the process has to contain the cobertura.ser file, or > the cobertura property has to be set that points to it. > > > > *From:* Fabien Bataille [mailto:fba...@gm...] > *Sent:* Tuesday, April 12, 2011 8:42 AM > *To:* cobertura-devel > *Subject:* [Cobertura-devel] 100% coverage but not all lines found > > > > *Hi all,** > > I am getting 100% coverage when running a lots of automatic tests (~1500) > on a big chunk of code. I found the following affirmation in the Cobertura > FAQ > > "Another common problem is that the cobertura.ser file is deleted, but the > previously instrumented classes are not also deleted. Any time you delete > your coverage data file you should also deleted all instrumented classes." > > Does anyone have more information on that ? I understood that Cobertura is > storing coverage data first in memory and then is flushing it to a file when > the JVM stops. So what is the pb to keep already instrumented classes, as > soon as the location of the cobertura.ser file does not change ? Is there > dynamic information stored into these classes ? > > As my platform is very huge instrumenting all classes at each run will last > more than 24 hours, so I managed to create a cache for the instrumented jars > in order not re-instrumenting them, as the cobertura.ser is always > generating at the same location, and deleted between each run. > > Thanks for your help ! > > Fabien* > |
89 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
