Research on Reproducible Builds
lamby at debian.org
Fri Mar 6 01:57:05 UTC 2020
> > This was curious to me too — to wit, the paper describes that the Debian
> > «wheezy» distribution was being built so it was interesting to me that
> > the first timestamp in the debian/changelog was not chosen, á la
> > SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH.
> If I recall correctly, wheezy was chosen precisely because it had *less*
> reproducibility fixes ... so that they could more easily tell how much
> dettrace solved...
Apologies if my previous email was in any way ambiguously phrased as it
appears you have accidentally misparsed it.
My query was not regarding why an *older* Debian distribution was
chosen (you are correct in your analysis) but rather that given that
*any* Debian release was chosen, the canonical timestamp was not taken
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` lamby at debian.org 🍥 chris-lamb.co.uk
More information about the rb-general