[Reproducible-builds] Bug#824689: cdbs: syntax error in perl-makemaker.mk

2016-05-18 Thread Niko Tyni 
Package: cdbs
Version: 0.4.133
Severity: serious
User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: ftbfs
X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org, 
pkg-perl-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org

Many packages are failing to build on current sid with these symptoms:

  /bin/sh: 1: Syntax error: ")" unexpected
  /usr/share/cdbs/1/class/perl-makemaker.mk:47: recipe for target 'Makefile' 
failed
  make: *** [Makefile] Error 2
  dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2

This seems to be a regression in cdbs 0.4.133, commit
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/cdbs.git/commit/?id=c0098c1979699fdb8099183ccf48455c009a71ac

-   $(error DEB_BUILDDIR and DEB_SRCDIR must be the same for Perl builds))
+   $(error DEB_BUILDDIR and DEB_SRCDIR must be the same \
+   for Perl builds)))

Note the added closing parenthesis.

Example failures include

 
https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/libweb-machine-perl.html
 
https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/rb-pkg/unstable/i386/libmoox-aliases-perl.html
 
https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/rb-pkg/unstable/i386/libmodule-install-trustmetayml-perl.html

-- 
Niko Tyni   nt...@debian.org

___
Reproducible-builds mailing list
Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#824653: elkcode: please make the build reproducible (environment)

2016-05-18 Thread Alexis Bienvenüe 
Source: elkcode
Version: 2.3.22-1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch upstream
User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: environment
X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org

Dear Maintainer,

While working on the “reproducible builds” effort [1], we have noticed
that 'elkcode' could not be built reproducibly.

The attached patch fixes the locale used by ls to sort files.
Once applied, elkcode can be built reproducibly in our current
experimental framework.

Regards,
Alexis Bienvenüe.

 [1]: https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds







Description: Set ls locale for reproducible order.
 Fix locale used with `ls', so that the order of the files listed is
 always the same. This makes the build reproducible.
Author: Alexis Bienvenüe 

--- elkcode-2.3.22.orig/src/Makefile
+++ elkcode-2.3.22/src/Makefile
@@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ cleanall:
 
 doc:
 	rm -f elk.aux elk.bbl elk.blg elk.log elk.pdf elk.tex elk.toc elk.lst
-	ls $(SRC_modules) $(SRC_routines) $(SRC_XC) $(SRC_phonon) $(SRC_DFTU) \
+	LC_ALL=C ls $(SRC_modules) $(SRC_routines) $(SRC_XC) $(SRC_phonon) $(SRC_DFTU) \
  $(SRC_RDMFT) $(SRC_TDDFT) > elk.lst
 	./protex -F -s $(SRC_main) $$(cat elk.lst) > elk.tex
 	pdflatex elk;pdflatex elk;pdflatex elk
___
Reproducible-builds mailing list
Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [Tails-dev] tails binary and source packages lists URL has changed…

2016-05-18 Thread intrigeri 
Holger Levsen wrote (18 May 2016 08:27:05 GMT) :
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 06:48:49PM +0200, intrigeri wrote:
>> > I'll gladly merge this whenever you tell me I should.
>> Please go ahead :)

> cool, done.

thanks!

> https://jenkins.debian.net/view/reproducible/view/Debian_misc/job/reproducible_create_meta_pkg_sets/401/console
> worked nicely, so yay!

:)

___
Reproducible-builds mailing list
Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Fwd: Re: [Python-modules-team] Bug#824266: mkdocs: Please support SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH specification for build time stamps [origin: b...@debian.org]

2016-05-18 Thread Axel Beckert 
Hi again,

Axel Beckert wrote:
> could someone more python-savvy than me have a look at this claim that
> our SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH example for Python on
> https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/TimestampsProposal#Examples
> is wrong.
> 
> The claim is here:
> https://github.com/mkdocs/mkdocs/issues/938#issuecomment-219574932

And the fix from the mkdocs folks for mkdocs is here:
https://github.com/waylan/mkdocs/commit/8b006bd7fda55e47e29412896c511c7244398f82

Regards, Axel
-- 
 ,''`.  |  Axel Beckert , http://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' :  |  Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `'   |  4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329  6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
  `-|  1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486  202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE

___
Reproducible-builds mailing list
Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds

[Reproducible-builds] Fwd: Re: [Python-modules-team] Bug#824266: mkdocs: Please support SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH specification for build time stamps [origin: b...@debian.org]

2016-05-18 Thread Axel Beckert 
Hi,

could someone more python-savvy than me have a look at this claim that
our SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH example for Python on
https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/TimestampsProposal#Examples
is wrong.

The claim is here:
https://github.com/mkdocs/mkdocs/issues/938#issuecomment-219574932

- Forwarded message from Brian May  -
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 09:16:36 +1000
From: Brian May 
To: Axel Beckert , 824...@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: [Python-modules-team] Bug#824266: mkdocs: Please support   
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH specification for build time stamps
Sender: Brian May 
Organization: Debian

Axel Beckert  writes:
> See https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/TimestampsProposal#Examples
> for some examples on how to implement support for SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH,
> including an example for Python.

Response from the upstream author (please consider replying to the
upstream bug report, not here):

"FYI, the Python example is wrong. If `SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH` is supposed to
be a Unix timestamp (number of seconds since epoch), then
`time.gmtime()` is not the Python equivalent. However,
`calendar.timegm(datetime.datetime.utcnow().utctimetuple())` or
`calendar.timegm(time.gmtime())` is. It is annoyingly complicated to get
a Unix timestamp in Python. Although Python >= 3.3 makes it easier with
`datetime.datetime.utcnow().timestamp()`.  Not sure how the `datetime`
module went so long without the ability to return a timestamp."
-- 
Brian May 
- End forwarded message -

Regards, Axel
-- 
 ,''`.  |  Axel Beckert , http://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' :  |  Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `'   |  4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329  6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
  `-|  1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486  202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE

___
Reproducible-builds mailing list
Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#824639: openblas: please make the build reproducible (fileordering)

2016-05-18 Thread Alexis Bienvenüe 
Source: openblas
Version: 0.2.18-1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch upstream
User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: fileordering
X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org

Dear Maintainer,

While working on the “reproducible builds” effort [1], we have noticed
that 'openblas' could not be built reproducibly.

The attached patch fixes the order files are passed to `ar' and gcc.
Once applied, openblas can be built reproducibly in our current
experimental framework.

Regards,
Alexis Bienvenüe.

 [1]: https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds





Description: Order files
 Order the files when calling `ar' or $(CC), to make the build reproducible.
Author: Alexis Bienvenüe 

Index: openblas-0.2.18/Makefile
===
--- openblas-0.2.18.orig/Makefile
+++ openblas-0.2.18/Makefile
@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ netlib :
 	mkdir lapack-netlib
 	cd lapack-netlib && ar -x /usr/lib/lapack/liblapack_pic.a
 	make -C interface delete-duplicate-lapack-objects
-	ar -ru $(LIBNAME) lapack-netlib/*
+	ar -ru $(LIBNAME) `LC_ALL=C ls lapack-netlib/*`
 
 clean::
 	rm -rf lapack-netlib
Index: openblas-0.2.18/interface/Makefile
===
--- openblas-0.2.18.orig/interface/Makefile
+++ openblas-0.2.18/interface/Makefile
@@ -2153,7 +2153,7 @@ libblas.so.3: $(SBLAS1OBJS) $(SBLAS2OBJS
 
 # The prerequisites must match the symbols deleted in target delete-duplicate-lapack-objects
 liblapack.so.3: $(SLAPACKOBJS) $(DLAPACKOBJS) $(CLAPACKOBJS) $(ZLAPACKOBJS) ../kernel/lsame.o ../driver/others/xerbla.o
-	$(CC) $(LDFLAGS) -shared -o $@ $^ ../lapack-netlib/* -Wl,-soname,liblapack.so.3 -L.. -lopenblas $(EXTRALIB)
+	$(CC) $(LDFLAGS) -shared -o $@ $^ `LC_ALL=C ls ../lapack-netlib/*` -Wl,-soname,liblapack.so.3 -L.. -lopenblas $(EXTRALIB)
 
 clean::
 	rm -f libblas.so.3 liblapack.so.3
___
Reproducible-builds mailing list
Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [Tails-dev] tails binary and source packages lists URL has changed…

2016-05-18 Thread Holger Levsen 
Hey,

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 06:48:49PM +0200, intrigeri wrote:
> >> I'm working on it and hope to fix it today.
> Repaired!
> > I'll gladly merge this whenever you tell me I should.
> Please go ahead :)

cool, done.

https://jenkins.debian.net/view/reproducible/view/Debian_misc/job/reproducible_create_meta_pkg_sets/401/console
worked nicely, so yay!

Thanks!


-- 
cheers,
Holger


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Reproducible-builds mailing list
Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds