Reproducible Builds Verification Format

Paul Spooren mail at
Tue May 12 21:00:41 UTC 2020

Hi all,

at the RB Summit 2019 in Marrakesh there were some intense discussions about
*rebuilders* and a *verification format*. While first discussed only with
participants of the summit, it should now be shared with a broader audience!

A quck introduction to the topic of *rebuilders*: Open source projects usually
offer compiled packages, which is great in case I don't want to compile every
installed application. However it raises the questions if distributed packages
are what they claim. This is where *reproducible builds* and *rebuilders* join
the stage. The *rebuilders* try to recreate offered binaries following the
upstream build process as close as necessary.

To make the results accessible, store-able and create tools around them, they
should all follow the same schema, hello *reproducible builds verification
format* (rbvf). The format tries to be as generic as possible to cover all open
source projects offering precompiled source code. It stores the rebuilder
results of what is reproducible and what not.

Rebuilders should publish those files publicly and sign them. Tools then collect
those files and process them for users and developers.

Ideally multiple institutions spin up their own rebuilders so users can trust
those rbuilders and only install packages verified by them.

The format is just a draft, please join in and share you thoughts. I'm happy to
extend, explain and discuss all the details. Please find it here[0].

As a proof of concept, there is already a *collector* which compares upstream
provided packages of Archlinux and OpenWrt with the results of rebuilders.
Please see the frontend here[1].

If you already perform any rebuilds of your project, please contacy me on how to
integrate the results in the collector!



More information about the rb-general mailing list