verifiable source-only bootstrap from scratch

Jeremiah at Jeremiah at
Fri Mar 10 03:15:22 UTC 2023

> The only kernel that is bootstrapped in the VSOBFS project is Minix-vmd.
If one is using the Linux from Scratch definition of bootstrapping, then
yes. But then you would be over 48 years too late in being the first
verifiable source-only bootstrap from scratch.

>> If you mean something else when you say bootstrappable and verifiable
>> builds; then perhaps you could be correct.
> This is nothing else than your personal opinion.

No, this is me attempting to politely clarify what you mean by those
terms that you are using because they don't match any of the normal
formal definitions for them that I have seen before.

> As far in this discussion as we are in, we disagree on the crucial point
> whether the projects you are involved in are the ultimate and the only
> needed solution. Please note that this thread is not about your projects
> and stay on topic.
Also incorrect. I am only attempting to clarify your meaning.

>> But as I understand the term bootstrappable, you are starting on done
>> and taking a step backwards and claiming to have gotten there first;
> The step is not backwards but in a direction you actually did not look at.
this step of building source code on an existing system in a
reproducible and verifiable fashion is a very old one in military
circles and it doesn't match the definition of a
bootstrap and hence the request for clarification.

> Please stop being rude and I kindly ask you to leave this thread.
Nothing expressed is rude, just a statement of verifiable facts based on
commonly available definitions. Remember, online communication lacks
proper tone and thus it is most beneficial to discuss things assuming
good faith in all parties.

> For further background, VSOBFS is a child of another project which
> _runs_ "minimal binary seed reproducible bootstrap" since 2017 [sic].
What would that project be, might be interesting to look at it, could
you please provide a link?

> If you take me to the court, I will present the proof and let you pay
> my expenses. Enough said.
Why would anyone take you to court over a simple clarification on intent
on meaning?


More information about the rb-general mailing list