Add handling for reformatted archives conditional on archive format version

[letitz]

Opening on behalf of @mverde to start reviewing early.

[letitz]

First round. I'm excited to see this land!

[letitz]

Smaller comments this time around, except that we still need tests :)

[letitz]

Why delete this test?

[mverde]

Ah sorry, this is actually something I meant to ask about but forgot over the weekend... this test seems exactly the same as the test that proceeds it other than in name. Do you happen to know if the test case is still relevant?

[cemon721-a11y]

Can you please explain me simply briefly in my reply. What's this about? And what should I do? And is there any else to fixed by my side , because there are lots of coding samples you give me,, kindly just tell me what should I do

…

On Fri, 30 Jan 2026, 23:50 Martin Verde, ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. ------------------------------ In src/clusterfuzz/_internal/tests/core/build_management/build_archive_test.py <#5145 (comment)>: > @@ -245,11 +290,50 @@ def test_other_fuzzer_not_extracted(self, dir_prefix): to_extract = [f.name for f in to_extract] self.assertCountEqual(to_extract, needed_files) + @parameterized.parameterized.expand(['/b/build/', 'build/', '']) + def test_possible_dependencies(self, dir_prefix): + """Tests that all the necessary dependencies are correctly extracted from + the runtime_deps file. + + Under the current archive schema, dependency paths in `runtime_deps` files Done. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5145 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/B332O6OI26BTIHVLDP7TJP34JOKU7AVCNFSM6AAAAACTARK4KKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZTOMRZGYZTKMZZGE> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[letitz]

Nearly there!

[letitz]

This function calls _generate_possible_fuzzer_dependencies() again even though we just did on the line above. How about passing in a list of relative paths directly, and calling this something like _resolve_relative_dependency_paths(fuzz_target_path, dependency_paths)?

[mverde]

I did something similar... how does this look?

[cemon721-a11y]

Thanks for the quick fix! Using getattr() to handle the missing attribute looks like the right approach. This will unblock our workflow." And if I did again some mistakes the kindly please Send Simply inbox To my Gmail address.