build: Remove `cmake/script/CoverageFuzz.cmake` #36161

1. 
   hebasto commented at 2:42 PM on September 3, 2026: member

   The gcov-based CoverageFuzz script was introduced in 8b6f1c4353836bae6aa683cbc65251165bd031ba, as a CMake's replacement for the legacy cov_fuzz target. However, neither cov_fuzz nor CoverageFuzz has a documented usage.

   Instead, #32206 documented compiling for fuzz coverage using the LLVM/Clang toolchain, which does not involve the CoverageFuzz script.

   This PR removes the never-documented CoverageFuzz script, which is likely unused.

2. build: Remove `cmake/script/CoverageFuzz.cmake`

   The `gcov`-based `CoverageFuzz` script was introduced in
   8b6f1c4353836bae6aa683cbc65251165bd031ba, as a CMake's replacement for
   the legacy `cov_fuzz` target. However, neither `cov_fuzz` nor
   `CoverageFuzz` has a documented usage.
   
   Instead, #32206 documented compiling for fuzz coverage using the
   LLVM/Clang toolchain, which does not involve the `CoverageFuzz` script.
   
   This change removes the never-documented `CoverageFuzz` script, which is
   likely unused.

   00a5f9b737
3. hebasto added the label Build system on Sep 3, 2026
4. hebasto added the label Fuzzing on Sep 3, 2026
5. 
   DrahtBot commented at 2:42 PM on September 3, 2026: contributor

   <!--e57a25ab6845829454e8d69fc972939a-->

   The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

   <!--006a51241073e994b41acfe9ec718e94-->

   Code Coverage & Benchmarks

   For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/36161.

   <!--021abf342d371248e50ceaed478a90ca-->

   Reviews

   See the guideline and AI policy for information on the review process.

   Type	Reviewers
   ACK	Crypt-iQ, sedited
   Concept ACK	fanquake

   If your review is incorrectly listed, please copy-paste <code>&lt;!--meta-tag:bot-skip--&gt;</code> into the comment that the bot should ignore.

   <!--5faf32d7da4f0f540f40219e4f7537a3-->

6. 
   hebasto commented at 2:43 PM on September 3, 2026: member

   Friendly ping fuzz people: @dergoegge @marcofleon @Crypt-iQ

7. 
   Crypt-iQ commented at 3:07 PM on September 3, 2026: contributor

   crACK 00a5f9b7375ec8dca944e200bd9bef6a29949409

   I use the llvm-based coverage so I am ok with removing this, but if somebody relies on this we could keep it

8. 
   fanquake commented at 8:14 AM on September 4, 2026: member

   Concept ACK

9. sedited approved
10. 
    sedited commented at 11:58 AM on September 5, 2026: contributor

    ACK 00a5f9b7375ec8dca944e200bd9bef6a29949409

    I've also been exclusively using an LLVM toolchain for coverage for some time now.

11. DrahtBot requested review from fanquake on Sep 5, 2026
12. sedited merged this on Sep 6, 2026
13. sedited closed this on Sep 6, 2026

    ---

14. hebasto deleted the branch on Sep 6, 2026
15. Kino1994 referenced this in commit 07731fdcbe on Sep 6, 2026
16. 
    maflcko commented at 2:43 PM on September 17, 2026: member

    Not sure why this needs a rushed removal, when it is still used?

    It would be good to revert this and then fix https://github.com/maflcko/b-c-cov/actions/runs/34930489881 and https://github.com/maflcko/DrahtBot/blob/main/coverage_fuzz/src/main.rs, etc ...

    #31047 is open for 2 years now, so it seems odd to silently rush this in 3 days instead of doing it properly and leaving a comment on that issue, taking the context into account.

17. 
    sedited commented at 2:48 PM on September 17, 2026: contributor

    My apologies, I was genuinely under the impression that nothing was using this.

18. 
    sedited commented at 3:06 PM on September 17, 2026: contributor

    Added it back in #36288

Review Requested
fanquake