On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 08:22:24PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Thu, 2016-07-07 at 20:52 +0200, Reiner Herrmann wrote: > > While working on the "reproducible builds" effort [1], we have noticed > > that linux could not be built reproducibly. > > Since we started varying the shell used for /bin/sh (bash vs. dash), > > linux no longer builds reproducibly. > > OOI what is the motivation for varying the build environment in this > way? > > Obviously a package built with $SHELL should build reproducibly with > the same $SHELL no matter which $SHELL is chosen so long as it is > consistent, but from the diff that doesn't seem to be what the goal is > here, but rather to build with $SHELL_A and then rebuild with a > different $SHELL_B. > > I thought part of the reproducible builds effort included ensuring a > reproducible build environment too (through .buildinfo etc). Is > changing the shell different to changing the compiler or some library > build dep? Different users have different shells configured, like they have different locales, different home directories, different file systems etc. The installed environment is actually the same (dash and bash are installed), but it is configured differently. We want packages not only building reproducibly in clean environments like chroots/VMs etc., but also when a user builds it with plain dpkg-buildpackage (assuming he has the matching dependencies installed).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature