On 02/06/2026 18:55, Bruno Haible via Gnulib discussion list wrote:
Hi,Anyone out here who is familiar with LLMs (or wants to get familiar with LLMs): How about using it not for coding, but for checking commits that went into gnulib master? Since 2026-01-01, at least 17 gnulib commits contained regressions, that had to be fixed subsequently. We often detect regressions by code review or by a CI run. The problems: - Not all commits gets reviewed from a different developer than the committer. (Like many free software projects, Gnulib lacks good reviewers.) - The CI runs possibly a week later. (We can't increase the frequency, because some CI runs fail due to network problems or other noise, and this noise needs to be filtered out.) As a complement to these QA techniques, Paul Eggert suggests to use an LLM to analyze the commits that have been pushed into gnulib master. This should be promising, because I read recently that LLMs outperform all classical static analysis tools, when it comes to analyzing source code. I can't do this myself, because I'm already quite loaded with the existing QA techniques and with my work on other GNU packages. Therefore, if you volunteer, please step up!
For reference, I see the kernel lists have:https://sashiko.dev/ which is based on Chris Mason's prompts discussed at: https://lwn.net/Articles/1041694/ It would be cool if it supported other high profile lists like gnulib etc. cheers, Padraig
