Re: Bug#894441: dpkg-buildpackage: SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH must ignore bin-nmu changelog entries. Breaks M-A:same

[Aurelien Jarno]

On 2018-04-12 19:41, Holger Levsen wrote:
> control: retitle -1 "buildd.d.o: binNMUs should be replaced by easy 
> no-change-except-d/changelog-uploads"
> # I hope this is correct, realistic and accurate ;)
> # if not, please fixup?
> #thanks

That can't be done on the wanna-build side, uploads to the archive needs
to be signed. Time to reassign this bug to ftp.debian.org?

Aurelien

-- 
Aurelien Jarno  GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net


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

package uploaded to our repo

[Mattia Rizzolo]

https://reproducible.alioth.debian.org/debian/python-setuptools_39.0.1-1.0~reproducible1.dsc
 has just been uploaded to 
https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/ExperimentalToolchain

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

package uploaded to our repo

[Mattia Rizzolo]

https://reproducible.alioth.debian.org/debian/gcc-7_7.3.0-21+really16.0~reproducible1.dsc
 has just been uploaded to 
https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/ExperimentalToolchain

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

Re: Bug#894441: dpkg-buildpackage: SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH must ignore bin-nmu changelog entries. Breaks M-A:same

[Holger Levsen]

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:09:44PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 12/04/18 21:41, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > control: retitle -1 "buildd.d.o: binNMUs should be replaced by easy 
> > no-change-except-d/changelog-uploads"
> > # I hope this is correct, realistic and accurate ;)
> > # if not, please fixup?
> > #thanks
> Removing binNMUs would be a problem whenever we need to do a large amount of
> rebuilds on just one architecture, e.g. due to a toolchain bug, a baseline 
> bump,
> or other reasons.

sure, hence the word "easy" in the bug title.


-- 
cheers,
Holger


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

Re: Bug#894441: dpkg-buildpackage: SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH must ignore bin-nmu changelog entries. Breaks M-A:same

[Emilio Pozuelo Monfort]

On 12/04/18 21:41, Holger Levsen wrote:
> control: retitle -1 "buildd.d.o: binNMUs should be replaced by easy 
> no-change-except-d/changelog-uploads"
> # I hope this is correct, realistic and accurate ;)
> # if not, please fixup?
> #thanks

Removing binNMUs would be a problem whenever we need to do a large amount of
rebuilds on just one architecture, e.g. due to a toolchain bug, a baseline bump,
or other reasons.

Emilio

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

Re: Bug#894441: dpkg-buildpackage: SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH must ignore bin-nmu changelog entries. Breaks M-A:same

[Holger Levsen]

control: retitle -1 "buildd.d.o: binNMUs should be replaced by easy 
no-change-except-d/changelog-uploads"
# I hope this is correct, realistic and accurate ;)
# if not, please fixup?
#thanks

-- 
cheers,
Holger


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

Re: Bug#894441: dpkg-buildpackage: SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH must ignore bin-nmu changelog entries. Breaks M-A:same

[Holger Levsen]

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 02:10:37PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Please, see my reply at . This is
> really a fundamental problem with binNMUs+multiarch-refcounting or how
> they are being issued. :)

FWIW I totally agree with what you wrote there, just that I dont see
other people agreeing so sadly I currently don't see this fixed anytime
soon. Which is pretty sad.


-- 
cheers,
Holger


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

Re: Bug#894441: dpkg-buildpackage: SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH must ignore bin-nmu changelog entries. Breaks M-A:same

[Julien Cristau]

Control: severity -1 wishlist

On 04/12/2018 02:10 PM, Guillem Jover wrote:

Control: reassign -1 buildd.debian.org

Hi!

On Thu, 2018-04-05 at 17:43:58 +0200, Jean-Michel Vourgère wrote:

On Friday, 30 March 2018 15:02:31 CEST Chris Lamb wrote:

[ https://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2017/05/msg00011.html ]


On Friday, 30 March 2018 20:15:33 CEST Sven Joachim wrote:

[ https://bugs.debian.org/843773 ]


Thanks a lot guys for pointing out that issue!

Basically, when doing bin-nmus, we really want to bump the mtime of the
distributed files. Not doing so results in some backups programs (rsync...) to
loose updates. Other programs restarting services on libraries updates
(needrestart...) would also be affected.


So, during compilation:
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH must ignore bin-nmu changelog entries
because it breaks Multi-Arch:same on bin-nmu.

During dpkg-deb (:
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH must *not* ignore bin-nmu changelog entries
because it would break software relying on files mtime.

Doh!

In https://bugs.debian.org/843773#75 Ian Jackson propose to introduce a
BUILD_DATE_EPOCH (= time of sbuild binnmu invocation) be prefered over
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH by dpkg-deb.

That would work, wouldn't it?


Please, see my reply at . This is
really a fundamental problem with binNMUs+multiarch-refcounting or how
they are being issued. :)

Indeed.  I suspect eventually we'll make no-change sourceful uploads 
less labor intensive and binNMUs will go away, but we're not there right 
now.


Cheers,
Julien

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

Re: Bug#894441: dpkg-buildpackage: SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH must ignore bin-nmu changelog entries. Breaks M-A:same

[Guillem Jover]

Control: reassign -1 buildd.debian.org

Hi!

On Thu, 2018-04-05 at 17:43:58 +0200, Jean-Michel Vourgère wrote:
> On Friday, 30 March 2018 15:02:31 CEST Chris Lamb wrote:
> > [ https://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2017/05/msg00011.html ]
> 
> On Friday, 30 March 2018 20:15:33 CEST Sven Joachim wrote:
> > [ https://bugs.debian.org/843773 ]
> 
> Thanks a lot guys for pointing out that issue!
> 
> Basically, when doing bin-nmus, we really want to bump the mtime of the 
> distributed files. Not doing so results in some backups programs (rsync...) 
> to 
> loose updates. Other programs restarting services on libraries updates 
> (needrestart...) would also be affected.
> 
> 
> So, during compilation:
> SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH must ignore bin-nmu changelog entries
> because it breaks Multi-Arch:same on bin-nmu.
> 
> During dpkg-deb (:
> SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH must *not* ignore bin-nmu changelog entries
> because it would break software relying on files mtime.
> 
> Doh!
> 
> In https://bugs.debian.org/843773#75 Ian Jackson propose to introduce a 
> BUILD_DATE_EPOCH (= time of sbuild binnmu invocation) be prefered over 
> SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH by dpkg-deb.
> 
> That would work, wouldn't it?

Please, see my reply at . This is
really a fundamental problem with binNMUs+multiarch-refcounting or how
they are being issued. :)

Thanks,
Guillem


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