Zig: a library with no product binary is asked for a ReleaseSafe build; an AFL packaging shim is a C fuzz target; setup-zig without `version` installs build.zig.zon's minimum_zig_version; `zig build fuzz` / `zig build test --fuzz`
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.
Valutazione
- Difficoltà
- 4/5
- Tempo stimato
- 3-5 giorni
- Idoneità per principianti
- 30/100
- Tipo di issue
- Bug
- Chiarezza
- Abbastanza chiara
- Stato di attività
- Attiva
- Ambito
- build-system, ci-cd, testing-qa
Direzione di ricerca
Start in ecosystems/zig.py, where _EXECUTABLE matches any addExecutable call and _read_programs treats that as a binary, so library build.zig files that only build examples or benchmarks wrongly pass the hardening check. The C/C++ fuzz-testing check also counts a comment-only __AFL_LOOP in pkg/afl++/afl.c as a fuzz target. Reproduce each with a minimal build.zig or .c fixture before changing anything. The Zig platform-matrix and fuzz gaps need a design decision first, so this is not a good first pick.
Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.
Descrizione
http.zig and libxev: hardening FAIL "release builds drop Zig's safety checks: no ReleaseSafe build" although the only addExecutable calls build examples and benchmarks (a library has no binary to harden → SKIP). ghostty: fuzz-testing counts its AFL++ packaging shim (a manual expansion of AFL's macros) as a C/C++ fuzz target. zig-clap, zls, libxev, ghostty: "1 Zig version (default)" while mlugg/setup-zig with no version installs build.zig.zon's minimum_zig_version. tigerbeetle: fuzz-testing SKIPs "not applicable to Zig" though Zig projects fuzz with zig build fuzz and, since 0.14, zig build test --fuzz / std.testing.fuzz.
Evidence from the corpus audit
karlseguin/http.zig (also mitchellh/libxev) / hardening
- kind: FALSE_POSITIVE
- actual: FAIL: release builds drop Zig's safety checks: no ReleaseSafe build
- expected: SKIP: "a library has no binary to harden" — the only
addExecutablecalls build the examples (and, in
libxev, the benchmarks). - evidence: http.zig
build.zig:81-83:for (examples) |ex| {/const exe = b.addExecutable(.{/.name = ex.name,
with.file = "examples/04_action_context.zig"entries at:70-78; libxevbuild.zig:194("src/bench/{s}"at
:197-200),:244and:259("examples/{s}"). Validator:ecosystems/zig.py:_EXECUTABLE = re.compile(r"\baddExecutable\s*\(")and_read_programs-> any match means "executable". - repro:
build.zigwhose onlyaddExecutablehas.root_source_file = b.path("examples/x.zig"). - confidence: medium
ghostty-org/ghostty / fuzz-testing
- kind: FALSE_POSITIVE
- actual: FAIL: C/C++: fuzz targets in 1 file(s), but no CI configuration runs a fuzz target binary ...
- expected: "no fuzz targets found" for C/C++: the one match is Ghostty's packaging shim for AFL++ (a manual expansion
of AFL's macros), not a product fuzz target. - evidence:
pkg/afl++/afl.c:14:// expand the AFL macros (__AFL_INIT, __AFL_LOOP, __AFL_FUZZ_INIT, etc.) and;
:102:// Manual expansion of __AFL_LOOP(UINT_MAX) — persistent mode loop.(the only file matching
LLVMFuzzerTestOneInput|__AFL_LOOPoutside.git). - repro: a
.cfile whose only__AFL_LOOPis in a comment. - confidence: low
Hejsil/zig-clap (also zls, libxev, ghostty) / platform-matrix
- kind: UNSUPPORTED
- actual: FAIL: CI covers ... 1 Zig version(s) (default)
- expected: n/a (gap):
mlugg/setup-zigwith noversioninput installs theminimum_zig_versionofbuild.zig.zon,
so "default" is a known version the validator could read from the manifest. - evidence:
.github/workflows/main.yml:14-16:- uses: mlugg/setup-zig@v2/with:/cache-key: ${{ matrix.optimize }}
(noversion);build.zig.zon:4:.minimum_zig_version = "0.18.0-dev.954+60635c2bd",. - repro: unclear (tool semantics)
- confidence: low
tigerbeetle/tigerbeetle / fuzz-testing
- kind: UNSUPPORTED
- actual: SKIP: not applicable to ... Zig
- expected: n/a (gap): Zig projects fuzz with a build step (
zig build fuzz) and, since Zig 0.14,zig build test --fuzz/std.testing.fuzz; the profile knows no Zig fuzzer, so TigerBeetle's fuzzers and VOPR are invisible. - evidence:
build.zig:168:.fuzz = b.step("fuzz", "Run non-VOPR fuzzers"),;:440-441:
// zig build fuzz -- --events-max=100 lsm_tree 123/build_fuzz(b, .{;:646:
build_ci_step(b, step_ci, .{ "fuzz", "--", "smoke" }, ...). Docs:docs/ecosystems/zig.md"no ... fuzzer ... the
validator knows reads Zig". - repro: unclear (tool support)
- confidence: low
Found by the regression-corpus audit (235 real repositories, one or more per ecosystem profile; corpus and expected results in corpus/). Evidence is quoted from the audited checkouts at the commits pinned in corpus/projects.toml; <checkouts>/<owner>__<repo> is such a checkout.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
- Lingua principale
- Python
- Stelle
- 4
- Fork
- 1
- Merge medio
- 10h 41m
- PR unite (30g)
- 79
Preparare l'ambiente
Questo progetto non fornisce container di sviluppo, Dockerfile né guida per i contributori, quindi l'ambiente è a tuo carico: parti dal suo README e consulta la nostra guida al primo contributo per i passaggi generali.
Come iniziare
- Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
- Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
- Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
- Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.
Altre issue di cpp-best-practices/project_validator
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 62/100
cpp-best-practices/project_validator#267 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 68/100
cpp-best-practices/project_validator#263 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 62/100
cpp-best-practices/project_validator#260 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 74/100
cpp-best-practices/project_validator#259 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 65/100
cpp-best-practices/project_validator#255 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
Tutte le issue di cpp-best-practices/project_validator
Issue simili
-
plot_graph crashes when a mesh node has no m2m edgeForse già presa @tygvi l’ha presa oggi. Aperta
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 78/100
mllam/neural-lam#883 · 1 commento ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 2 giorni
-
enhancement possible-duplicate
Difficoltà 1/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 78/100
AOSSIE-Org/PictoPy#1715 · 2 commenti ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 6 giorni
-
SQLite connector omits generated columns from the catalog, and drops relationships sourced on themAperta
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 72/100
NVIDIA/auto-ontology#511 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 72/100
ethereum/execution-specs#3996 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 72/100
Project-N-E-K-O/N.E.K.O#3725 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno