Bug#932795: How to handle FTBFS bugs in release architectures
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 02:40:06PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
>...
> This is really like a weak form of "reproducible builds", as in "every
> time I try to build the package in a capable system, the build succeeds".
Is a single-core system capable of rebuilding a package with parallel=64 ?
> The issue nobody answered so far is: How do we make the archive
> reproducible again (in this weak sense) if we don't introduce the
> Build-CPU field *and* we stop enforcing that packages must build from
> source regardless of the number of CPUs?
>...
The number of CPUs used is already in the buildinfo file.
> (How could we ever make reproducible builds mandatory in some future if
> we are not even able to make the build *reliable* in a stable release?)
>...
Reproducible builds only require that one gets the same binary package
when building the same sources in the environment described in buildinfo.
When buildinfo of a binary package in the archive says
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="parallel=12"
then it is sufficient for reproducibility that the package builds with
exactly these DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS.
Reproducibility can also be considered wider so that the same should be
true when changing parallel= values or other cariations like rebuilding
in an Estonian locale (which sorts z between s and t), but for the
usecase of being able to prove that a given binary was built from
given sources supporting such variations is not required.
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
Reply to: