Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rake fails with rcov warning for getc #52

Open
dchelimsky opened this issue May 20, 2010 · 5 comments
Open

Rake fails with rcov warning for getc #52

dchelimsky opened this issue May 20, 2010 · 5 comments
Labels

Comments

@dchelimsky
Copy link

The following rcov issue was reported to rspec-core (http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/issues/19):


If I comment out line 340 in rcov, it works:

Zlib::GzipReader.open(file){|gz| old_data = Marshal.load(gz) }

Stack trace below:

/Users/coreyhaines/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.8.7-p249/bin/ruby -I "/Users/coreyhaines/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.8.7-p249/gems/cucumber-0.6.4/lib:lib" -S rcov -Ilib -Ispec --exclude "mocks,expectations,gems/,features,spec/ruby_forker,spec/rspec,spec/resources,spec/lib,spec/spec_helper.rb,db/,/Library/Ruby/,config/" --text-report --sort coverage --aggregate coverage.data "/Users/coreyhaines/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.8.7-p249/gems/cucumber-0.6.4/bin/cucumber" -- --format progress /Users/coreyhaines/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.8.7-p249/gems/rcov-0.9.8/bin/rcov:340: warning: getc is obsolete; use STDIN.getc instead

@abedra
Copy link
Contributor

abedra commented May 20, 2010

Does this happen all the time, or is there certain things that provoke it? Is there a small sample app that can demonstrate this? I will make sure to fix the warning sometime today or tomorrow, but I would like to make sure I get the real issue taken care of asap.

@dchelimsky
Copy link
Author

I just moved it over from rspec's issues :) Haven't actually reproduced it on my own machine, but my recollection is it had to do with an old version of zlib. See http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/issues/issue/18 for more context - I think they're related.

@abedra
Copy link
Contributor

abedra commented May 20, 2010

We might be able to do away with that LoC all together. I need to look a the code a little more and make sure i'm not missing something important, but I don't think this is even necessary anymore.

@abedra
Copy link
Contributor

abedra commented May 21, 2010

Update: It looks like there are still some corner cases where this is useful and required. I will see what I can do about making this work. A sample application would be really helpful in making sure I get things patched up.

@abedra
Copy link
Contributor

abedra commented Jan 23, 2012

I'm interested to see if this is still an issue. @dchelimsky can we chat about this sometime soon?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants