adding start to rules

Signed-off-by: vsoch <vsoch@users.noreply.github.com>

abi-python/python/README.md

@@ -115,3 +115,24 @@ we can use that to try and write a logic program. I also added in the third libr
 because it became clear that we could never know the set of symbols that are supposed
 to be provided, and these are the `needed_symbol` groups. Now I'm working on writing logic in [is_compatible.lp](is_compatible.lp)
 to first derive this set of needed symbols. After that, I'll look at [compute_diff](https://github.com/woodard/libabigail/blob/40aab37cf04214504804ae9fe7b6c7ff4fd1500f/src/abg-comparison.cc#L11031) in libabigail to derive more rules after that.
+
+See [rules.md](rules.md) for breaking down this function in libabigail. In the facts,
+I'm currently at having a check over symbols and for just one architecture. It's pretty
+limited but it's a start!
+
+```bash
+(clingo-env) root@b32e9108f711:/code/python# clingo facts.lp is_compatible.lp 
+clingo version 5.4.0
+Reading from facts.lp ...
+Solving...
+Answer: 1
+architecture_count(1) total_missing(4)
+SATISFIABLE
+
+Models       : 1
+Calls        : 1
+Time         : 0.006s (Solving: 0.00s 1st Model: 0.00s Unsat: 0.00s)
+CPU Time     : 0.006s
+```
+Note that since we don't take unique orders of things, the missing is likely doubled.
+But for now we don't care because it's > 0.

abi-python/python/asp.py

@@ -587,6 +587,10 @@ def generate_corpus_metadata(self, corpora):
             # Note that we could update these to just be corpus_attr, but I'm
             # starting with testing a more detailed approach for now.
 
+            # If the corpus has a soname:
+            if corpus.soname:
+                self.gen.fact(fn.corpus_soname(corpus.path, corpus.soname))
+
             # File class (also at elffile.elfclass or corpus.elfclass
             self.gen.fact(fn.corpus_elf_class(corpus.path, hdr["e_ident"]["EI_CLASS"]))
 

abi-python/python/is_compatible.lp

@@ -11,6 +11,16 @@
 % corpus("/code/simple-example/cpp/libmath-v1.so").
 % We can maybe use a basename
 % corpus_basename("/code/simple-example/cpp/libmath-v1.so","libmath-v1.so").
+% If we are deriving from spack, I also don't see why we can't include 
+% other libraries (we are sure about) that are needed to find extra symbols,
+% although libabigail doesn't do that.
+
+%=============================================================================
+% Matching function and variable symbols
+% symbols are missing if they are needed (present in the working library),
+% not undefined in the working library (indicating they come from elsewhere)
+% and undefined in both the potential library and binary.
+%=============================================================================
 
 % A symbol is undefined in this case.
 symbol_is_undefined(Corpus, Symbol) :- symbol_definition(Corpus, Symbol, "UND").
@@ -48,37 +58,41 @@ missing_symbols(CorpusA, CorpusB, Symbol)
    :- symbol_is_needed(Symbol),
       both_symbols_undefined(CorpusA, CorpusB, Symbol).
 
-% Two corpora have a compatible symbol if it's shared, and at least one is defined
-% This is my attempt to capture an OR
-%compatible_symbols(CorpusA, CorpusB, Symbol)
-%   :- shared_symbol(CorpusA, CorpusB, Symbol),
-%      symbol_is_undefined(CorpusA, Symbol).
-
-%compatible_symbols(CorpusA, CorpusB, Symbol)
-%   :- shared_symbol(CorpusA, CorpusB, Symbol),
-%      symbol_is_undefined(CorpusB, Symbol).
-
-% a missing symbol is not defined in either (indicating we are missing libs)
-%missing_symbols(CorpusA, CorpusB, Symbol)
-%   :- shared_symbol(CorpusA, CorpusB, Symbol),
-%      both_symbols_undefined(CorpusA, CorpusB, Symbol).
-
 % Try to create a count of missing symbols
+% TODO: this will be double if we count CorpusA, CorpusB and CorpusB, CorpusA (twice)
 get_missing_symbols(S) :- missing_symbols(_, _, S).
 total_missing(N) :- #count{X:get_missing_symbols(X)} = K, K=N.
 
 %total_compatible(N) :- #count{X:get_compatible_symbols(X)} = K, K=N.
 
 
+%=============================================================================
+% Matching soname and architecture
+% libraries must have matching soname and architecture
+%=============================================================================
+
+% libabigail just compares the libs, but why not compare to the binary too?
+%shared_architecture(CorpusA, CorpusB)
+%  :- corpus_elf_machine(CorpusA, _, A)
+get_architecture(A) :- corpus_elf_machine(_, A).
+architecture_count(N) :- #count{X:get_architecture(X)} = K, K=N.
+
+% todo: I don't think my data has sonames, need to add or figure out why not in
+% dynamic tags
+% get_soname(A) :- corpus_elf_soname(_, A).
+% soname_count(N) :- #count{X:get_soname(X)} = K, K=N.
+
+% TODO I will want to print this out more clearly, probably the is_compatible
+% function could use arguments for Corpora.
 % Two corpora are compatible if:
 are_compatible()
 
   % there are no missing symbols
-  :- total_missing(N) = 0.
+  :- total_missing(N) == 0.
 
-% TODO I will want to print this out more clearly, probably the is_compatible
-% function could use arguments for Corpora.
-%#show compatible_symbols/3.
-%#show total_shared/1.
-%#show total_compatible/1.
-#show missing_symbols/3.
+  % there is only one architecture
+  :- architecture_count(N) == 1.
+
+#show total_missing/1.
+#show architecture_count/1.
+%#show soname_count/1.