Skip to content

feat: CLI prove use bin name for output path #1675

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 5 commits into
base: release-v1.2.1-rc.0
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

stephenh-axiom-xyz
Copy link
Contributor

Resolves INT-4074. Primarily accomplishes the following:

  • cargo openvm prove outputs proofs to ${bin_name}.app.proof instead of app.proof, where bin_name is the file stem of the executable (same for stark and evm)
  • cargo openvm verify by default searches the working directory for files with extension .app.proof

Additionally, the following are also in this PR:

  • cargo openvm init ${dir} creates directory dir if it doesn't already exist
  • Updates to the book to reflect recent CLI changes

Options `--manifest-path`, `--target-dir` are also available to `verify`. If you omit `--app_vk` and/or `--proof`, the command will search for those files at `${target_dir}/openvm/app.vk` and `./app.proof` respectively.
Options `--manifest-path`, `--target-dir` are also available to `verify`. If you omit `--app_vk` the command will search for the verifying key at `${target_dir}/openvm/app.vk`.

If you omit `--proof`, the command will search the working directory for files with the `.app.proof` extension. Note that for this default case a single proof is expected to be found, and `verify` will fail otherwise.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think verify should always pass in --proof to be explicit

Ok(committed_exe)
Ok((
committed_exe,
exe_path.file_stem().unwrap().to_str().unwrap().to_string(),
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

maybe exe_path.file_stem().unwrap().to_string_lossy().into_owned()?

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.

2 participants