"Reproducible build" definition in OpenSSF glossary

Eric Myhre hash at exultant.us
Mon Apr 28 08:51:45 UTC 2025


On 4/27/25 10:52 PM, David A. Wheeler via rb-general wrote:
> How about replacing "souce code" with "build inputs (e.g., source code)"?
> The first sentence then becomes:
>
>> Reproducible builds are a set of software development practices that create an independently-verifiable path from build inputs (e.g., source code)
>> to build artifacts (e.g., binary code) that counters attacks on the build process.
>>

I think this above is a great definition!

Specifically because it handles this (very real, very practical) 
scenario so gracefully:

>> We permit higher-level builds to use build inputs
>> that are not reproducible, e.g., due to closed-source drivers, but those build inputs
>> present a higher risk since they cannot themselves be reproduced.
>>
>

... as long as there's also some language about using those 
less-reproducible inputs only via some logged fixed point / snapshot of 
those materials.  (Probably "obvious" to us, but the sort of "obvious" 
that's worth putting in the docs nonetheless.)



For a bit of historical spice:

If I recall correctly, we had considerable discussion about exactly this 
bit of phrasing about "what is source, really" during the in-person time 
at the summit where the current definitions were heavily workshopped.  
Exactly who was holding forth on what positions fades from my 
recollection... but I think a considerable amount of interest in the use 
of the word "source" so prominently came from people who were interested 
in what we'd now call the "bootstrappable" story.  (And at the time, the 
word "bootstrappable", that entire website, and so forth, had not yet 
come to be!)

So, several years later, where now it is the case that now that the 
"bootstrappable" story is more established, and has claimed its own set 
of words... maybe now an adjustment of the definition of "reproducible" 
to a focus on "build inputs" (and stepping every so slightly aside from 
the debate of "source") will be more tenable to everyone.  Both stories 
have happy representation now!


More information about the rb-general mailing list