[Git][reproducible-builds/reproducible-website][master] Interview Jochen: Update publish date, fix formatting

[Jochen Sprickerhof (@jspricke)]

Jochen Sprickerhof pushed to branch master at Reproducible Builds / reproducible-website


Commits:
5ca55013 by Jochen Sprickerhof at 2026-09-03T08:17:15+02:00
Interview Jochen: Update publish date, fix formatting

- - - - -


1 changed file:

- _posts/2026-08-25-supporter-spotlight-jochen-sprickerhof.md


Changes:

=====================================
_posts/2026-08-25-supporter-spotlight-jochen-sprickerhof.md
=====================================
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 layout: post
 title: "Supporter spotlight: Jochen Sprickerhof on ... Reproducible Builds!"
 draft: true
-date: 2026-08-25 00:00:00
+date: 2026-09-15 00:00:00
 categories: org
 ---
 
@@ -35,7 +35,6 @@ I started my Debian journey as a teenager, converting my school to Debian and se
 **Vagrant: What projects did you recently make big progress on?**
 
 **Jochen:**
-
 A recent example is [*metasnap.debian.net*](https://metasnap.debian.net). It is a 'meta archive' of
 [*snapshot.debian.org*](https://snapshot.debian.org) which is itself archive of all packages in Debian. But let
 me explain it the other way round: with *reproduce.debian.net*, we try to reproduce the packages as they are distributed by the Debian archive. For that, we need the same build environment (compilers, libraries, build tools, etc) that was used by Debian back when the original package was compiled. Luckily, *snapshot.debian.org* has all those packages, but they are not easily accessible via *apt*, Debian's package manager. So, *metasnap* provides a mapping from a package name and version pair to the APT repo on *snapshot.debian.org* needed to download it from. It was created by `josch` some time ago, and is an awesome work. But when we tried to reproduce more and more packages on *reproduce.debian.net*, we found that some were missing packages from the build environment — even though they where visible on *snapshot.debian.org*. We found that *metasnap* excluded some archive areas because they where not expected to be needed. Reimporting all the data took more than two months and surfaced a couple more flaws.
@@ -96,7 +95,6 @@ You can check for yourself — [it was last time I checked](https://reproduce.de
 **Vagrant: Oh, that's a nice URL to check for reproducible package... you can just pass the source package name to check the current results?**
 
 **Jochen:**
-
 Yes. Another one is [`udd.debian.org/reproducibility/hello`](https://udd.debian.org/reproducibility/hello), where you
 can list all packages of a Debian maintainer. It also lists source reproducibility and has nice filters as well.
 



View it on GitLab: https://salsa.debian.org/reproducible-builds/reproducible-website/-/commit/5ca55013d2764efc683bb159d5030f488289295f

-- 
View it on GitLab: https://salsa.debian.org/reproducible-builds/reproducible-website/-/commit/5ca55013d2764efc683bb159d5030f488289295f
You're receiving this email because of your account on salsa.debian.org. Manage all notifications: https://salsa.debian.org/-/profile/notifications | Help: https://salsa.debian.org/help


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.reproducible-builds.org/pipermail/rb-commits/attachments/20260903/64be113f/attachment.htm>