Re: [PATCH 0/2] fuzz: build fuzzers by default on Linux

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 26, 2024, 21:51 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq1q7w8xx6.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <cover.1709673020.git.steadmon@google.com>

Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com> writes:

> Increase our protection against fuzzer bit-rot by making sure we can
> link the fuzz test executables on Linux. Patch 1 is a small CI config
> improvement to fix compiler feature detection. Patch 2 is the Makefile /
> config.mak.uname change to add the executables to `make all` on Linux.

This has seen a handful of review comments but they haven't been responded nor resulted in a new round. Can we wrap this up anytime soon?

We would expect a review comment to be at least responded to either rebut or admit the issues raised. It may be that a reviewer's point were missing the mark and the patches themselves were perfectly fine.

But all other cases, even when the reviewer's comment were missing the mark, such a confusion may have been the result of the patch text or the proposed log message being unclear. Of course, the review comments may have been pointing out an actionable issue. They would hopefully lead to an improved version of the patches posted sometime later, so that we can conclude a topic and move ahead.

Thanks.