I've configured Karma to report the coverage of my JavaScript code. Here is the part of the configuration in the karma.conf.js file:

coverageReporter: {
  reporters: [
    {
      type: 'html',
      dir: 'build/karma/coverage'
    },
    {
      type: 'lcov',
      dir: 'build/karma/coverage',
      subdir: '.'
    },
    {
      type: 'cobertura',
      dir: 'build/karma/coverage'
    }
  ]
},

My lcov.info file has the following format:

TN:
SF:./app/scripts/app.js
FN:16,(anonymous_1)
FN:26,(anonymous_2)
FNF:2
FNH:1
FNDA:1,(anonymous_1)
FNDA:0,(anonymous_2)
DA:2,1
DA:20,1
DA:29,0
DA:34,0
LF:4
LH:2
BRF:0
BRH:0
end_of_record

Unfortunately, the Sonarqube JavaScript plugin only considers the lines that start with SF:, DA: or BRDA: (cf LCOVParser).

Due to that, the LCOV HTML report (made by Istanbul) gives me a higher code coverage than Sonar on the same data.

Is there a way to change the format of the lcov.info generated?

If I look in Istanbul code, I can imagine the meaning of the different labels:

• BRF, BRH, BRDA are for branches.
• FN, FNF, FNH, FNDA are for functions.
• LN, LF, LH are for lines.
• *F is the total, while *H is the covered information.

The difference between the Istanbul and Sonar coverage seems to be due to the fact that the latter completely ignores the Functions and Branches coverage.

Any idea to solve that?