[rb-general] Core Debian reproducibility: how close?

[Justin Cappos]

Just my two cents here, but there are a few communities that are presenting
difficulties for the reproducibility of many packages (such as a few
<https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/issues/unstable/gcc_captures_build_path_issue.html>
issues
<https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/issues/unstable/build_id_differences_only_issue.html>
with gcc).

We've been in communication to try to upstream patches as well as have
workarounds for some issues in place when the distro builds software.  But
really to predict, you'd need to know when these communities will upstream
fixes.

I have a group of eager students wading in and fixing what they can, but
it's really hard to know when patches will be accepted and when they will
not...

Thanks,
Justin

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 10:42 PM David A. Wheeler <dwheeler at dwheeler.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 22:26:12 -0400, Chris Lamb <lamby at debian.org> wrote:
> > David,
> >
> > > If there's an estimated time of arrival that'd be awesome... is
> > > there one?
> >
> > As I am sure you are aware Debian doesn't, generally speaking, work
> > on that sort of timeline basis. "As soon as possible", "yesterday",
> > "when it's ready", etc. etc.
>
> That was the answer I was *expecting*, just not the one I was *hoping* for
> :-).
>
> > > Also, one of those items looks more like a "future nice to have"
> > > than something necessary to counter subverted binaries
> >
> > Sounds about right; fancy updating the wiki to match? Thanks.
>
> Done.  I modified "Big outstanding issues" by moving several items to a
> new section
> "Nice to have".  If it's not right, please fix away!!
>
> > > It might be better to primarily focus efforts on getting the
> reproducible
> > > builds for the core packages actually used by people.  Perhaps that's
> > > already happening, it's not clear to me just from following the mailing
> > > list.
> >
> > That is mostly what is happening; the weekly reports might be a
> > better reflection of this quotidian work rather than the mailing
> > list which will by-and-large just handle the exceptional cases.
>
> Understand.
>
> My email may have come off harshly, and I didn't mean it that way.
> I'm a big fan of the reproducible build effort.  My concern is that
> there is a real need for reproducible builds to get to users... the
> sooner, the better!
>
> --- David A. Wheeler
> _______________________________________________
> rb-general at lists.reproducible-builds.org mailing list
>
> To change your subscription options, visit
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.reproducible-2Dbuilds.org_listinfo_rb-2Dgeneral&d=DwIGaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=pBUzYT2JbX021FhMBH-_ZQ&m=eKXraReMOeNKK8L_P0Ej9SC2WFpJuaU7XQeL8lNQpYs&s=ZrKlHNuP1bosTZ2u-TAlhfxNqJFnieZcXcxIOnwj4uI&e=
> .
>
> To unsubscribe, send an email to
> rb-general-unsubscribe at lists.reproducible-builds.org.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.reproducible-builds.org/pipermail/rb-general/attachments/20181025/28e5165f/attachment.html>