Zeshun Huang

Chenyu Zhao, Shenglin Zhang, Zeshun Huang et al.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown growing potential in software engineering, yet few benchmarks evaluate their ability to repair software during migration across instruction set architectures (ISAs). Cross-ISA migration, such as between x86_64 and aarch64, requires handling complex dependencies, heterogeneous toolchains, and long build logs while ensuring executable verification. To address this challenge, we present Build-bench, an end-to-end benchmark that systematically evaluates the capability of LLMs to repair build failures in cross-ISA settings. Build-bench collects 268 real-world failed packages and integrates auxiliary tools including Structure Extraction, File Content Extraction, Content Modification, and Build Verification to support autonomous, tool-augmented reasoning. The repair process operates in an iterative loop where, upon failure, the model receives updated build logs and previous repair outcomes to refine subsequent attempts. Through a comparative evaluation across the studied models, Build-bench reveals that current models achieve a maximum build success rate of 63.19% and tool usage patterns differ significantly across models. By coupling real build environments with verifiable outcomes, Build-bench establishes the first architecture-aware benchmark for studying LLM-based software build and repair.

Chenyu Zhao, Minghua Ma, Shenglin Zhang et al.

Frequent toolchain updates and growing ISA diversity have made system-level software package repair increasingly important. Diagnosing and repairing build failures remains challenging because failures involve heterogeneous evidence, dependency constraints, and architecture-specific build conventions. While recent LLM-based repair methods show promise for project-level source fixes, they struggle with system-level repair, where failures span multi-language artifacts such as build recipes, scripts, and source archives, and require iterative validation through external build services. In this paper, we first conduct a systematic empirical study of real-world system-level build failures. We find that 72% of failures stem from dependency and environment misconfigurations rather than isolated code defects, suggesting that effective repair must prioritize packaging logic and iterative feedback. Motivated by these insights, we propose EvidenT, an evidence-preserving repair framework that decouples iteration-aware evidence management from tool execution. EvidenT includes: (1) an external Build Service for reproducible execution and feedback; (2) an Evidence-Preserving Repair Controller that fuses repair history, knowledge context, and build artifacts; and (3) an automated Repair Orchestrator that invokes modular tools for failure localization and system-level repair in a closed-loop validation environment. We evaluate EvidenT on 219 real-world RISC-V package build failures. EvidenT repairs 118 packages (53.88%), outperforming state-of-the-art agentic baselines (20.55%) and direct LLM-based repair (1.83%). To assess architectural generality, we extend EvidenT to legacy ISAs by updating only ISA-specific knowledge context. Preliminary experiments achieve success rates of 41.77% on aarch64 and 46.99% on x86_64, demonstrating robustness across diverse hardware ecosystems.