Runing findbugs

[Joseph D. Darcy]

I agree that having results of findbugs (and other checkers) as one of 
the results of the build would be a good idea.

-Joe

Max (Weijun) Wang wrote:
> Since it takes so long time, how about the release engineer running it 
> once after every build and post the result to openjdk.java.net? Hope 
> some people would read it and send us fixes.
> 
> Max
> 
> On May 14, 2008, at 7:37 AM, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
>>
>> I'm currently looking at how we could possible include a run of findbugs
>> in the build process, but my conclusion right now is that we cannot do it
>> by default, it takes way to long to run findbugs over everything. 
>> (>12hrs).
>>
>> But I could add some minor support to the Makefiles to allow someone to
>> run findbugs on specific classes/packages, using a command line like 
>> this:
>>
>>   findbugs -textui -maxHeap 1024 -javahome /YOUR/jdk1.6.0 -sortByClass \
>>            -onlyAnalyze "IMPORT_SPEC" -html -output report.html \
>>            CLASSES_DIRECTORY_OR_JAR
>>
>> For example, after I have built the jdk, you could run findbugs over just
>> the java.lang.* classes:
>>
>>   findbugs -textui -maxHeap 1024 -javahome /opt/java/jdk1.6.0 
>> -sortByClass \
>>            -onlyAnalyze "java.lang.*" -html -output report.html \
>>             build/solaris-i586/classes
>>
>> Ideally you want a fully populated classes directory or jar file so
>> that it can analyze all the classes properly.
>> (Note: using java.lang.* does not include the classes in the nested 
>> packages).
>>
>> But people could just run the findbugs GUI and do the same thing, or 
>> better
>> yet, run the findbugs modules in the NetBeans IDE or Eclipse IDE.
>>
>> So I'm at a loss as to whether I should include anything in the makefiles
>> for this at all. Maybe I was premature in adding findbugs as a build 
>> dependence
>> on the jdk and it should just be removed?
>>
>> Any ideas out there? Or comments?
>>
>> -kto
>>
>>
>>
>