# Trying to introduce flags triggers error on processing reports **URL:** \ **Category:** Support\ **Tags:** github\ **Created:** [January 7, 2021, 6:41pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450 "2021-01-07T18:41:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Pike](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/community.codecov.com/pike/32/1453_2.png) [@Pike](https://community.codecov.com/u/Pike)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2021, 6:41pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450/1 "2021-01-07T18:41:38Z")
### Description Adding flags to an existing working codecov installation triggers a processing reports error. ### Commit SHAs > **[Code coverage done right.](https://app.codecov.io/gh/mozilla/pontoon/commit/0f533f02c9239eed33becff841fd8f014eaf50d9/)** > > Hosted coverage report highly integrated with GitHub, Bitbucket and GitLab. Awesome pull request comments to enhance your QA. ### Repository > **[GitHub - mozilla/pontoon: Mozilla's Localization Platform](https://github.com/mozilla/pontoon/)** > > Mozilla's Localization Platform ### CI/CD or Build URL > ### Uploader The individual workflows continue to the python and node uploaders as before, I only addded the `-F` arguments to add the respective flags. ### Codecov Output ```auto _____ _ / ____ | | | | | _____ | | ______ _______ | | / _ \ / _` |/ _ \/ __/ _ \ \ / / | |___| (_) | (_| |__/ (_| (_) \ V / \ _____\___ / \ __,_|\___ |\ ___\___ / \_/ v3.8.1 ==> Detecting CI Provider GitHub Actions CI Detected ==> Configuration: Endpoint: https://codecov.io { commit: '39181d407eb274bec24d34335ab4d0ba9311b3eb', branch: 'flags', package: 'node-v3.8.1' } ==> Building file structure ==> Generating gcov reports (skip via --disable=gcov) $ find /home/runner/work/pontoon/pontoon -type f -name '*.gcno' -exec gcov {} + Failed to run gcov command. ==> Scanning for reports + /home/runner/work/pontoon/pontoon/frontend/coverage/lcov.info + /home/runner/work/pontoon/pontoon/frontend/coverage/clover.xml ==> Uploading reports Success! View report at: https://codecov.io/github/mozilla/pontoon/commit/0f533f02c9239eed33becff841fd8f014eaf50d9 ``` ### Expected Results Processed four reports ### Actual Results No reports shown on the PR ### Additional Information I locally verified the yml via ```auto curl --data-binary @.codecov.yml https://codecov.io/validate Valid! { "comment": false, "flags": { "backend": { "paths": [ "(?s:/pontoon/.*\\.py.*)\\Z" ], "carryforward": true }, "frontend": { "paths": [ "^/frontend/.*" ], "carryforward": true }, "non-frontend-js": { "paths": [ "(?s:/tests/.*\\.js.*)\\Z", "^/pontoon/static/js/.*" ], "carryforward": true } } } ``` ---
**Author:** ![tom](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/community.codecov.com/tom/32/8_2.png) [@tom](https://community.codecov.com/u/tom)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2021, 11:35pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450/2 "2021-01-08T23:35:01Z")
@Pike, I wonder if this has to do with the paths. Would you be able to remove them from the yaml and see if that works for you? We can see if it’s something there if you get a comment/report afterwards. ---
**Author:** ![Pike](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/community.codecov.com/pike/32/1453_2.png) [@Pike](https://community.codecov.com/u/Pike)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2021, 1:43pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450/3 "2021-01-09T13:43:35Z")
Thanks, I commented out the paths, and that reports allright. Would that work carrying test results forward w/out specifying the paths? ---
**Author:** ![tom](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/community.codecov.com/tom/32/8_2.png) [@tom](https://community.codecov.com/u/tom)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2021, 5:09pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450/4 "2021-01-14T17:09:25Z")
@Pike, I’m glad that worked out for you. I’d like to get to the bottom of this if you don’t mind. Would you be able to share a SHA if you add back in say the `backend` paths? ---
**Author:** ![Pike](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/community.codecov.com/pike/32/1453_2.png) [@Pike](https://community.codecov.com/u/Pike)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2021, 5:59pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450/5 "2021-01-14T17:59:26Z")
No problem, [Code coverage done right.](https://codecov.io/github/mozilla/pontoon/commit/d3720487f0d8bdb9f31c93bdb1049a2addd59f2f) reproduces again. ---
**Author:** ![tom](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/community.codecov.com/tom/32/8_2.png) [@tom](https://community.codecov.com/u/tom)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2021, 5:29pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450/6 "2021-01-18T17:29:22Z")
@Pike sorry I’m either reading this wrong or I wasn’t clear, would it be possible to only add paths for one of the flags? ---
**Author:** ![Pike](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/community.codecov.com/pike/32/1453_2.png) [@Pike](https://community.codecov.com/u/Pike)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2021, 2:25pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450/7 "2021-01-20T14:25:20Z")
HI @tom , updated the PR for [Code coverage done right.](https://codecov.io/gh/mozilla/pontoon/commit/bdfd1cdc06409df07dab6b68c4db06be431d2892/build). It has paths just for the backend flag. Here’s what I see right now: No obvious error as before, three coverage assets are up. But I don’t see the results for the python tests on [Code coverage done right.](https://codecov.io/gh/mozilla/pontoon/tree/bdfd1cdc06409df07dab6b68c4db06be431d2892/pontoon), some 15 minutes after the asset upload. ---
**Author:** ![tom](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/community.codecov.com/tom/32/8_2.png) [@tom](https://community.codecov.com/u/tom)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2021, 2:32pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450/8 "2021-01-21T14:32:20Z")
@Pike, I made a code suggestion [here](https://github.com/mozilla/pontoon/pull/1801/files#r561925053). I think it might be the starting backslash. ---
**Author:** ![Pike](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/community.codecov.com/pike/32/1453_2.png) [@Pike](https://community.codecov.com/u/Pike)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2021, 4:54pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450/9 "2021-01-21T16:54:39Z")
Seems the leading `/` was indeed the problem. @tom, do the results look like they should to you, too? ---
**Author:** ![tom](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/community.codecov.com/tom/32/8_2.png) [@tom](https://community.codecov.com/u/tom)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2021, 5:05pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450/10 "2021-01-21T17:05:10Z")
@Pike, looks good to me! Let me know if you are running into anything else strange. ---
**Author:** ![Pike](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/community.codecov.com/pike/32/1453_2.png) [@Pike](https://community.codecov.com/u/Pike)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2021, 3:40pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450/11 "2021-01-24T15:40:56Z")
As a follow-up, would it make sense for the validator to catch issues like this? ---
**Author:** ![tom](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/community.codecov.com/tom/32/8_2.png) [@tom](https://community.codecov.com/u/tom)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2021, 10:36pm UTC](https://community.codecov.com/t/trying-to-introduce-flags-triggers-error-on-processing-reports/2450/12 "2021-01-25T22:36:44Z")
@Pike, I lost a little context (our logs don’t go back to the original issue), but there are instances where having the ‘/’ is ok. I don’t think we can strictly validate against it.