Hi Florian, On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 03:47:20PM +0000, Baeuerle, Florian wrote: > Hi, > > I'm currently trying to get reproducible barebox binaries. > > One problem I'm facing is, that the barebox defaultenv generated during build > depends on the filesystem used on the build machine. That is, because > envfs_save() uses recursive_action(), which in turn uses readdir() without > sorting the entries afterwards. > > quoting man readdir: > The order in which filenames are read by successive calls to readdir() > depends > on the filesystem implementation; it is unlikely that the names will be sorted > in any fashion. > > In fact, on ext4 I get a different barebox binary as on XFS. > > > Is this considered something worth being fixed?
Yes, sure. > > It should be sufficient to build a list of directories and sort it before > recursing. It is, however, shared code which is also used by the saveenv > command > and I'm not sure if malloc'ing recursively is a good idea on all targets where > saveenv is used. > > I would go ahead and implement it if no one opposes. > > Should I introduce a flag for recursive_action() that allows taking an > "unsorted" (non-malloc) code path for use with the saveenv command? Yes, that would be good. I guess there's no point in letting barebox sort the entries. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
