[mythtv] status of MythTV wrt Coverity Scan

Eric Sharkey eric at lisaneric.org
Mon May 7 15:34:13 UTC 2012

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Stuart Morgan <stuart at tase.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sunday 06 May 2012 23:00:36 Eric Sharkey wrote:
>> I'll see if I can get a build done with the Coverity analyzer
>> tomorrow.  Unless someone has another opinion, I'll use the fixes/0.25
>> branch built on x86-64.
> We should use master, since it's better to fix new bugs before they make it
> into the next release.

Coverity has a concept that they call "streams" which are kind of like
branches, but often a single branch might have multiple streams if it
can be compiled more than one way (e.g., compiled with/without
debugging, etc.).  Coverity can test all these streams and coordinate
the defect reports across streams.  Ultimately you'll want to have a
stream for master and another stream for the latest fixes branch.  I
thought it would be simpler, on the first run, to start with a fixes
branch as that should be more stable, then add a stream for master
once the mechanics of using Coverity are better understood.

At this point in time, I would expect the vast majority of defect
reports will be shared by fixes/0.25 and master.

> We can use one of the buildbots to supply the binaries they need. We should
> discuss that with Gavin.

Eventually it should all be automated, yes, but again, I think doing
the first submission by hand would make sense, then all the developers
can look at the results and see if there's even interest in continuing
to use the tool.


More information about the mythtv-dev mailing list