[rb-general] Comparison of the Debian and Arch .buildinfo approaches (was: Re: buildinfo filename convention)

Holger Levsen holger at layer-acht.org
Sun Aug 19 17:26:39 CEST 2018

On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 04:09:04PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> before that, intrigeri wrote:
> > The unique identifier of said description is the latest Git commit
> > that modified our vagrant/ directory. And then the description
> > essentially includes everything in that directory, such as VM build
> > scripts and pointers to the specific snapshots of the Debian APT
> > archive that will be used in the VM
> Thanks for this. I've added a pointer to this thread to my merge
> request against the Debian Installer to ensure that we capture enough
> buildinfo-like metadata:
>   https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/debian-installer/merge_requests/3#note_38705

awesome, thank you both!

Just https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/debian-installer/merge_requests/3
is closed via Chris's NMU, isn't it? If so, maybe turn note_38705 into a
new bug/merge_request?

I'm also thinking about documenting the different types of .buildinfo
files we have somewhere, and I somewhat refrain from using the Debian
wiki, but maybe I shouldn't? 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.reproducible-builds.org/pipermail/rb-general/attachments/20180819/5178ac36/attachment.sig>

More information about the rb-general mailing list