Missing support for CFLAGS="-fsanitize=fuzzer"? #7761
Comments
|
The meson.build file you linked manually links libfuzzer into the final executable, so CFLAGS="-fsanitize=fuzzer-no-link" may solve the issue: |
|
Now it builds, just as it does when I don't use the flag at all. But this doesn't bring me further unfortunately: CFLAGS="-fsanitize=fuzzer-no-link" CC=clang CXX=clang++ meson build-clang -Db_lundef=false [jmaloy@f31 libslirp]$ cd build-clang/ [1/36] Compiling C object libslirp.so.0.0.0.p/src_ip6_output.c.o [jmaloy@f31 build-clang]$ ./fuzzing/fuzz-input ../fuzzing/IN/* ///jon |
|
Based on the meson.build file in the commit you linked, you could try: That will link libfuzzer into the fuzz-input binary. |
|
Better, but: In my Makefile version I built libFuzzer myself and linked to it, but that cannot possibly be the intention. |
|
Maybe those meson.build files were written with a manually compiled libFuzzer in mind. It may be easier to modify them to add "-fsanitize=fuzzer" on the fuzz-input executable() in meson.build. Then you don't need to use llvm-fuzz=true and it will use clang's version of libfuzzer. Something like this: executable(
'fuzz-input', [extra_sources, 'fuzz-input.c'],
dependencies : deps,
c_args : '-fsanitize=fuzzer',
link_args : '-fsanitize=fuzzer',
)But I don't know the intention of the original meson.build files, they seem to have Google OSS-Fuzz support so maybe they expect an environment where libfuzzer has been provided... |
|
Yes, that, plus that I commented out main() in fuzz_main.c, solved it. |
|
It seems to me meson recently (<1y) changed the way CFLAGS are checked. Now with CFLAGS="-fsanitize=fuzzer" it will fail to link during configure step. So CFLAGS="-fsanitize=fuzzer-no-link" seems necessary. And in theory, LDFLAGS="-fsanitize=fuzzer" should help too, but LDFLAGS seems not working (anymore?). So Stefan solution is good to me. In general, I think we should avoid using environment variables anyway, and instead have meson.build handle adding/removing the flags (this may be annoying for things like OSSFuzz though) . And it would be nice if meson gained b_sanitize=fuzzer. (sadly, the combination of ASAN options there isn't very good either) |
|
Really we should just extend the b_sanitize option to handle fuzzer correctly. Hand rolling this stuff is hard and easy to break, which is why we have the built-in option |
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2022
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. A list makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the list we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitize')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, a special check has been added to the
get_option() call for `b_sanitize`, which converts it to a list if the
compatibility is < 0.62, with a warning that the behavior will change in
the future.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2022
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. A list makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the list we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitize')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, a special check has been added to the
get_option() call for `b_sanitize`, which converts it to a list if the
compatibility is < 0.62, with a warning that the behavior will change in
the future.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2022
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. A list makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the list we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitize')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, a special check has been added to the
get_option() call for `b_sanitize`, which converts it to a list if the
compatibility is < 0.62, with a warning that the behavior will change in
the future.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2022
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. A list makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the list we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitize')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, a special check has been added to the
get_option() call for `b_sanitize`, which converts it to a list if the
compatibility is < 0.62, with a warning that the behavior will change in
the future.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2022
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. A list makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the list we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitize')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, a special check has been added to the
get_option() call for `b_sanitize`, which converts it to a list if the
compatibility is < 0.62, with a warning that the behavior will change in
the future.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Feb 4, 2022
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitize')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, a special check has been added to the
get_option() call for `b_sanitize`, which converts it to a string if the
compatibility is < 0.62, with a warning that the behavior will change in
the future.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Feb 23, 2022
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitize')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, a special check has been added to the
get_option() call for `b_sanitize`, which converts it to a string if the
compatibility is < 0.62, with a warning that the behavior will change in
the future.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Feb 23, 2022
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitize')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, a special check has been added to the
get_option() call for `b_sanitize`, which converts it to a string if the
compatibility is < 0.62, with a warning that the behavior will change in
the future.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Jun 6, 2022
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitize')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, a special check has been added to the
get_option() call for `b_sanitize`, which converts it to a string if the
compatibility is < 0.63, with a warning that the behavior will change in
the future.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Jun 6, 2022
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitize')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, a special check has been added to the
get_option() call for `b_sanitize`, which converts it to a string if the
compatibility is < 0.63, with a warning that the behavior will change in
the future.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
3 tasks
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Dec 20, 2023
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitizers')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, `get_option('b_sanitize')` is
guaranteed to return a string with the values in the same order, unless
a new value is added.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Dec 20, 2023
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitizers')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, `get_option('b_sanitize')` is
guaranteed to return a string with the values in the same order, unless
a new value is added.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Sep 18, 2024
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitizers')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, `get_option('b_sanitize')` is
guaranteed to return a string with the values in the same order, unless
a new value is added.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Sep 18, 2024
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitizers')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, `get_option('b_sanitize')` is
guaranteed to return a string with the values in the same order, unless
a new value is added.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Sep 19, 2024
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitizers')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, `get_option('b_sanitize')` is
guaranteed to return a string with the values in the same order, unless
a new value is added.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Sep 19, 2024
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitizers')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, `get_option('b_sanitize')` is
guaranteed to return a string with the values in the same order, unless
a new value is added.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Sep 19, 2024
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitizers')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, `get_option('b_sanitize')` is
guaranteed to return a string with the values in the same order, unless
a new value is added.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Sep 19, 2024
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitizers')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, `get_option('b_sanitize')` is
guaranteed to return a string with the values in the same order, unless
a new value is added.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Sep 19, 2024
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitizers')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, `get_option('b_sanitize')` is
guaranteed to return a string with the values in the same order, unless
a new value is added.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Sep 20, 2024
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitizers')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, `get_option('b_sanitize')` is
guaranteed to return a string with the values in the same order, unless
a new value is added.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
dcbaker
added a commit
to dcbaker/meson
that referenced
this issue
Sep 20, 2024
There are a lot of sanitizers these days, and trying to keep up with
them would be entirely too much work. Instead we'll do a compile check
to see if the option is valid. An array makes more sense than a string,
since users could just write `address,undefined` or they could write
`undefined,address`. With the array we get to handle that ourselves and
users writing code know that it's not safe to simply do a check like
```meson
if get_option('b_sanitize') == 'address,undefined'
...
endif
```
instead they need to do something like
```meson
opt = get_option('b_sanitizers')
if opt.contains('address') and opt.contains('undefined')
...
endif
```
To ensure backwards compatibility, `get_option('b_sanitize')` is
guaranteed to return a string with the values in the same order, unless
a new value is added.
Fixes mesonbuild#8283
Fixes mesonbuild#7761
Fixes mesonbuild#5154
Fixes mesonbuild#1582
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I am trying to build a system with meson where fuzzing is activated.
The code I am trying to build is here:
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/elmarco/libslirp/-/commit/9fba8af484ec6bc10b22e3f49d9e34d95c28b086
However, when I try to build it according to the second method in the commit log I get the following:
FLAGS="-fsanitize=fuzzer" CC=clang CXX=clang++ meson build-clang -Db_lundef=false
The Meson build system
Version: 0.55.3
Source dir: /home/jmaloy/fuzzing/lureau/libslirp
Build dir: /home/jmaloy/fuzzing/lureau/libslirp/build-clang
Build type: native build
Project name: slirp
Project version: 4.0.0
Using 'CC' from environment with value: 'clang'
Using 'CFLAGS' from environment with value: '-fsanitize=fuzzer'
meson.build:1:0: ERROR: Compiler clang can not compile programs.
A full log file can be found at /home/jmaloy/fuzzing/lureau/libslirp/build-clang/meson-logs/meson-log.txt
[jmaloy@f31 libslirp]$
The log referred to above looks as follows:
Build started at 2020-09-19T15:11:11.217041
Main binary: /usr/bin/python3
Build Options: -Db_lundef=false
Python system: Linux
The Meson build system
Version: 0.55.3
Source dir: /home/jmaloy/fuzzing/lureau/libslirp
Build dir: /home/jmaloy/fuzzing/lureau/libslirp/build-clang
Build type: native build
None of 'PKG_CONFIG_PATH' are defined in the environment, not changing global flags.
None of 'PKG_CONFIG_PATH' are defined in the environment, not changing global flags.
Project name: slirp
Project version: 4.0.0
Using 'CC' from environment with value: 'clang'
Using 'CFLAGS' from environment with value: '-fsanitize=fuzzer'
None of 'LDFLAGS' are defined in the environment, not changing global flags.
None of 'CPPFLAGS' are defined in the environment, not changing global flags.
None of 'CC_LD' are defined in the environment, not changing global flags.
Sanity testing C compiler: clang
Is cross compiler: False.
None of 'CC_LD' are defined in the environment, not changing global flags.
Sanity check compiler command line: clang /home/jmaloy/fuzzing/lureau/libslirp/build-clang/meson-private/sanitycheckc.c -o /home/jmaloy/fuzzing/lureau/libslirp/build-clang/meson-private/sanitycheckc.exe -fsanitize=fuzzer -pipe -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
Sanity check compile stdout:
Sanity check compile stderr:
/usr/bin/ld: /tmp/sanitycheckc-2fd9d1.o: in function
main': sanitycheckc.c:(.text.main[main]+0x0): multiple definition ofmain'; /usr/lib64/clang/9.0.1/lib/linux/libclang_rt.fuzzer-x86_64.a(FuzzerMain.cpp.o):(.text.startup[.text.startup.group]+0x0): first defined here/usr/bin/ld: /usr/lib64/clang/9.0.1/lib/linux/libclang_rt.fuzzer-x86_64.a(FuzzerMain.cpp.o): in function
main': (.text.startup[.text.startup.group]+0xf): undefined reference toLLVMFuzzerTestOneInput'clang-9: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation)
meson.build:1:0: ERROR: Compiler clang can not compile programs.
My environment looks as follows:
$ uname -a
Linux f31 5.7.15-100.fc31.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Aug 11 17:18:01 UTC 2020 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
(I.e., Fedora31)
[jmaloy@f31 libslirp]$ clang --version
clang version 9.0.1 (Fedora 9.0.1-2.fc31)
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
InstalledDir: /usr/bin
[jmaloy@f31 libslirp]$ meson --version
0.55.3
[jmaloy@f31 libslirp]$ python --version
Python 3.7.8
[jmaloy@f31 libslirp]$ ninja --version
1.9.0
I contacted the author of the program, but despite the commit log message he cannot remember he even tried this option, so I suspect this never worked for him either.
BR
Jon Maloy jmaloy@redhat.com
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: