Re: Profile-directed feedback and remote testing

[Timothy J.Wood <tjw at omnigroup dot com>]

On Mar 24, 2005, at 11:59 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:

> When we generate data for feedback, we insert the .gcda name into the 
> object file as an absolute path.  As a result, when we try to do 
> remote testing, we lose, as, in general the remote file system does 
> not have the same file hierarchy as the build system.

  A similar thing happens for coverage files (.bb., .bbg, .da) (the 
file goes into the cwd of the compiler when invoked).

> I understand why we generate an asbolute path; we want to make sure 
> that the data ends up there, not in the directory where the user 
> happens to run the program.  So, I intend to disable these tests when 
> $host != $target.  Any objections, or better ideas?

  A compiler option to set the target directory for these files (and 
the coverage ones!) would be great.  Possibly even better would be an 
environment variable.  If the user wants to compare two sets of 
coverage information from two sets of tests, they shouldn't have to 
rebuild their entire project to do so (though I guess they could do 
directory swapping after each run).

-tim