[Git][reproducible-builds/reproducible-presentations][master] 2 commits: toulouse talk: drop stuff about other projects
Holger Levsen (@holger)
gitlab at salsa.debian.org
Thu Nov 14 17:15:25 UTC 2024
Holger Levsen pushed to branch master at Reproducible Builds / reproducible-presentations
Commits:
318d445a by Holger Levsen at 2024-11-14T18:14:31+01:00
toulouse talk: drop stuff about other projects
Signed-off-by: Holger Levsen <holger at layer-acht.org>
- - - - -
0de3480e by Holger Levsen at 2024-11-14T18:15:17+01:00
toulouse talk: drop stuff about rebuilder-snapshot.d.n
Signed-off-by: Holger Levsen <holger at layer-acht.org>
- - - - -
2 changed files:
- 2024-11-16-R-B-rebuilding-what-is-distributed-from-ftp.debian.org/index.html
- 2024-11-16-R-B-rebuilding-what-is-distributed-from-ftp.debian.org/todo
Changes:
=====================================
2024-11-16-R-B-rebuilding-what-is-distributed-from-ftp.debian.org/index.html
=====================================
@@ -1253,29 +1253,6 @@ Warpforge.
</ul>
</section>
- <section data-background="images/Capitole_du_libre_logo.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
- <h3>another quick side quest, an idea from the summit 2023: do we need all of snapshot.d.o?</h3>
- <ul>
- <li>70000 binary packages in Debian $suite</li>
- <li>these build-depend on only 30000 packages, so 40000 packages are never used as build-depends.</li>
- <li class="fragment">let's analyze all those <em>.buildinfo</em> files!</li>
- <li class="fragment">those 30000 packages are only used in 100000 variations!</li>
- <li class="fragment">that's less than 100 GB per arch and suite!</li>
- <li class="fragment">https://rebuilder-snapshot.debian.net was born.</li>
- </ul>
- </section>
-
- <section data-background="images/Capitole_du_libre_logo.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
- <h3>https://rebuilder-snapshot.debian.net</h3>
- <ul>
- <li>a cache for snapshot.debian.org, which stores only the packages used as build-depends <em>today</em> and makes them available via SHA256, path and an API.</li>
- <li class="fragment">1 TB instead of 150 TB (for all release archs and stable+testing+unstable)</li>
- <li class="fragment">needs <code>metasnap.debian.net</code></li>
- <li class="fragment">still in development</li>
- <li class="fragment">will be useful to take load from snapshot.d.o and for offline rebuilds</li>
- </ul>
- </section>
-
<section data-background="images/Capitole_du_libre_logo.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
<h3>more Debian Reproducible Builds successes</h3>
<ul>
@@ -1285,60 +1262,7 @@ Warpforge.
</ul>
</section>
- <section data-background="images/Capitole_du_libre_logo.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
- <h3>Short overview of reproducibility of various projects (AIUI)</h3>
- <ul class="fragment">
- <li>This section is a bit outdated and incomplete. I'm sorry. And I'm very happy there's so much great stuff going on!</li>
- <li>I'll probably skip this in the talk but will leave it here for those reading the slides.</li>
- </ul>
- </section>
-
- <section data-background="images/Capitole_du_libre_logo.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
- <h3>Short overview of reproducibility of various projects (AIUI)</h3>
- <ul>
- <li>Tails: "easy", pragmatically solved.</li>
- <li>Arch Linux: has rebuilders and snapshot binary archive, though lacks further infrastructure and thus user tools like <code>pacman-bintrans</code> are PoCs.</li>
-
- <pre>
-Arch Linux is 86.4% reproducible with 1701 bad and 10849 good packages.
-[core] repository is 93.3% reproducible with 17 bad and 238 good packages.
-[extra] repository is 94.1% reproducible with 171 bad and 2860 good packages.
-[community] repository is 83.8% reproducible with 1481 bad and 7674 good packages.
-</pre>
- <li>SuSE: active development, by one person, not enabled in official builds</li>
- </ul>
- </section>
- <section data-background="images/Capitole_du_libre_logo.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
- <h3>Short overview of reproducibility of various projects, continued</h3>
- <ul>
- <li>nixOS: https://reproducible.nixos.org: 1570 out of 1572 (99.87%) paths in the minimal installation image are reproducible.</li>
- <li>GNU Guix: also reproducible by design (like nixOS) - <em>guix-challenge</em></li>
- <li>Yocto: support for reproducible images.</li>
- <li>F-Droid: supports reproducible builds though no UI (manual web crawling needed) nor promises.<ul>
- </ul>
- </section>
-
- <section data-background="images/Capitole_du_libre_logo.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
- <h3>Short overview of reproducibility of various projects, continued</h3>
- <ul>
- <li>Alpine: basic support.</li>
- <li>ElectroBSD/FreeBSD/NetBSD/OpenBSD: basic support.</li>
- <li>Fedora/Redhat/Ubuntu: not interested it seems.</li>
- <ul>
- <li class="fragment">though Fedora 38 (April 2023) enabled clamping mtimes of package files using SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH from changelog when building packages. YAY!</li>
- </ul>
- </ul>
- </section>
-
- <section data-background="images/Capitole_du_libre_logo.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
- <h3>Summary of various projects</h3>
- <ul>
- <p>Today many projects support reproducible builds, but it's often still unclear what that means in detail, how it's enforced and how users can know and be confident.</p>
- <p class="fragment">I call it reproducible in theory or in CI.</p>
- <p class="fragment">This is a <em>massive</em> success! This was thought impossible not long ago!</p>
- </ul>
- </section>
<section data-background="images/Capitole_du_libre_logo.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
<h3>Theory vs Praxis</h3>
=====================================
2024-11-16-R-B-rebuilding-what-is-distributed-from-ftp.debian.org/todo
=====================================
@@ -8,7 +8,11 @@ ask people for $arch hardware to setup rebuilderd instances
mention riscv64 nodes
admins wanted
mention netbsd table?
-out of scope: ? mention potential debian.tests.r-b.o, archlinux.t.r-b.o, though atm tests.r-b.o points to ci tests, thats confusing
+
+out of scope: ?
+ mention potential debian.tests.r-b.o, archlinux.t.r-b.o, though atm tests.r-b.o points to ci tests, thats confusing
+ Today many projects support reproducible builds, but it's often still unclear what that means in detail, how it's enforced and how users can know and be confident. I call it reproducible in theory or in CI. This is a massive success! This was thought impossible not long ago!
+
rebuilderd packaging status:
[21:28] < kpcyrd> e9cd56f7a33d96681d68f5302fedd6d129062191e461b7ad4aa45e8188a41cd4 2029260 rebuildctl_0.20.0-1_amd64.deb
View it on GitLab: https://salsa.debian.org/reproducible-builds/reproducible-presentations/-/compare/4a323c08e51d59037dcbe9d3ee6c9aafeb50e534...0de3480e6e10a4239abee053e782164157d65585
--
View it on GitLab: https://salsa.debian.org/reproducible-builds/reproducible-presentations/-/compare/4a323c08e51d59037dcbe9d3ee6c9aafeb50e534...0de3480e6e10a4239abee053e782164157d65585
You're receiving this email because of your account on salsa.debian.org.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.reproducible-builds.org/pipermail/rb-commits/attachments/20241114/896557a3/attachment.htm>
More information about the rb-commits
mailing list