Skip to content

[DRAFT] add bitwuzla build for linux #678

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

charles-cooper
Copy link

@charles-cooper charles-cooper commented Mar 9, 2025

Description

fix #654

Checklist

  • tested locally
  • added automated tests
  • updated the docs
  • updated the changelog

@charles-cooper charles-cooper marked this pull request as draft March 9, 2025 10:36
@charles-cooper charles-cooper marked this pull request as ready for review March 9, 2025 13:33
@msooseth msooseth changed the title draft - add bitwuzla build for linux [DRAFT] add bitwuzla build for linux Mar 18, 2025
@msooseth
Copy link
Collaborator

msooseth commented Apr 7, 2025

First of all, thank you for this! I really like that you managed to make it build! At the same time, I agree with some of the folks that we shouldn't be adding bitwuzla to our build system. Even though bitwuzla is basically a requirement to run hevm at a reasonable pace. What do you think we should do? I wanna release a new hevm, so I am a bit unsure what we should do... Any ideas welcome :)

Mate

@charles-cooper
Copy link
Author

charles-cooper commented Apr 7, 2025

First of all, thank you for this! I really like that you managed to make it build! At the same time, I agree with some of the folks that we shouldn't be adding bitwuzla to our build system. Even though bitwuzla is basically a requirement to run hevm at a reasonable pace. What do you think we should do? I wanna release a new hevm, so I am a bit unsure what we should do... Any ideas welcome :)

Mate

i mainly just copied the existing windows build :)

i would say that if bitwuzla is effectively a requirement for hevm, it makes sense to bundle it as part of the release binaries, especially until bitwuzla starts releasing their own binaries. essentially, it is the pragmatic, rather than the "purist" approach. it could be a separate file, but documenting that it is there in the readme will make it much easier for people to use hevm "as intended". the reason is that it introduces unnecessary friction for people who are trying to run hevm, it's not entirely clear which bitwuzla version or how to get the binary.

that is just what i would do if i were a maintainer of hevm. since you ultimately have to make the decision whether the maintenance overhead is worth it. if you judge it's not worth it, feel free to close the PR, no worries!

@gustavo-grieco
Copy link
Contributor

Is the optional cryptominisat dependency from bitwuzla useful for hevm?

@msooseth
Copy link
Collaborator

Honestly, not really. I am the CryptoMiniSat author, so I am allowed to say that :D But in some cases, it certain is a huge benefit. It depends on the case. But in general, likely not.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

add solver binaries to the release artifacts
3 participants