llvm dev - May 2017 - moving libfuzzer to compiler-rt?

> Does anyone see good reasons why libFuzzer should remain in llvm repo (as
> opposed to moving it to compiler-rt)?
Does moving LibFuzzer to compiler-rt imply that it is compiled as part
of compiler-rt and shipped with it?

How does that fit with LibFuzzer's model of allowing the user to
provide their own `main()`. Would you just build two different
libraries. One with a `main()` and one without?

Thanks,
Dan.

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Dan Liew <dan at su-root.co.uk> wrote:
> > Does anyone see good reasons why libFuzzer should remain in llvm repo
(as
> > opposed to moving it to compiler-rt)?
>
> Does moving LibFuzzer to compiler-rt imply that it is compiled as part
> of compiler-rt and shipped with it?
>
> How does that fit with LibFuzzer's model of allowing the user to
> provide their own `main()`.

libFuzzer doesn't allow users to use their own main (not any more).
Although I am not sure how that's related to moving libFuzzer somewhere.

> Would you just build two different
> libraries. One with a `main()` and one without?
>
> Thanks,
> Dan.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170509/0917b552/attachment.html>

> On May 9, 2017, at 10:55 AM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com>
wrote:
> 
> libFuzzer doesn't allow users to use their own main (not any more). 
> Although I am not sure how that's related to moving libFuzzer
somewhere.
That’s neither here nor there, but at least in my experience on Darwin,
somehow if I link something which already has its main with libFuzzer,
user’s main is executed, and libFuzzer's main is ignored.

On 9 May 2017 at 18:55, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com>
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Dan Liew <dan at su-root.co.uk>
wrote:
>>
>> > Does anyone see good reasons why libFuzzer should remain in llvm
repo
>> > (as
>> > opposed to moving it to compiler-rt)?
>>
>> Does moving LibFuzzer to compiler-rt imply that it is compiled as part
>> of compiler-rt and shipped with it?
>>
>> How does that fit with LibFuzzer's model of allowing the user to
>> provide their own `main()`.
>
>
> libFuzzer doesn't allow users to use their own main (not any more).
> Although I am not sure how that's related to moving libFuzzer
somewhere.
Oops. That shows how long it's been since I looked at the source code.

It was related in that if LibFuzzer was shipped as part of compiler-rt
I presumed we would need to supply both libraries to end users.
Given that this feature was removed it is a non-issue.