On 2024.03.26 14:51, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Josh Steadmon <steadmon@xxxxxxxxxx> 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. Sorry for letting this sit for so long. I'll be addressing comments and sending a V2 soon.
