Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-13 Thread Michael Biebl
Am 13.09.18 um 23:22 schrieb Chris Lamb: > Nice work. Is this… > > > https://salsa.debian.org/systemd-team/systemd/commit/2e03e24734ef51cd47e1dd0ded3a701bbc936cbf Those are the changes from https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/10067 which drop the usage of the hard-coded

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-13 Thread Chris Lamb
Hey Michael, > Thanky you all for your input. I think we found a solution upstream > which works reasonably nice, so I've cherry-picked those changes and > they seem to be sufficient to make the the build reproducible. Nice work. Is this…

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-13 Thread Michael Biebl
Am 13.09.18 um 09:51 schrieb Chris Lamb: > Hi Vagrant, > >> Is it plausible to strip the embedded build directory information out of >> the test binaries with the binaries shipped in the package Just curious: which tool would you use for such a case? > But why not hardcode said path to

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-13 Thread Chris Lamb
Hi Vagrant, > Is it plausible to strip the embedded build directory information out of > the test binaries with the binaries shipped in the package, since they > will almost certainly not have access to the original build directory, > and it interferes with the reproducibility of the test

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-12 Thread Vagrant Cascadian
On 2018-09-10, Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 10.09.18 um 19:22 schrieb Chris Lamb: >>> Now, I could try and convince upstream to not embed ABS_BUILD_DIR into >>> the binary and maybe let the build system pass the build dir as env var. >>> This would make those test-binaries a bit more cumbersome to

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-10 Thread Michael Biebl
Am 10.09.18 um 19:22 schrieb Chris Lamb: > Hi Michael, > >> Now, I could try and convince upstream to not embed ABS_BUILD_DIR into >> the binary and maybe let the build system pass the build dir as env var. >> This would make those test-binaries a bit more cumbersome to use though, >> because

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-10 Thread Chris Lamb
Hi Michael, > Now, I could try and convince upstream to not embed ABS_BUILD_DIR into > the binary and maybe let the build system pass the build dir as env var. > This would make those test-binaries a bit more cumbersome to use though, > because you'd have to manually set the env var if you

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-10 Thread Michael Biebl
Am 10.09.18 um 04:28 schrieb Michael Biebl: > Thanks Chris > > Am 09.09.18 um 21:31 schrieb Chris Lamb: >> Spent a couple moments on this. The first thing that can be addressed >> is the absolute CATALOG_DIR which ends up in the /usr/lib/systemd/ >> tests/test-catalog binary in the systemd-tests

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-10 Thread Holger Levsen
control: severity -1 minor thanks On Sun, Sep 09, 2018 at 08:28:14AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > Severity: wishlist I've upgraded to minor because a.) it's a violation of a "should" directive in policy (thus wishlist is too low) and b.) systemd is only unreproducible with variation of the

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-09 Thread Michael Biebl
Thanks Chris Am 09.09.18 um 21:31 schrieb Chris Lamb: > Spent a couple moments on this. The first thing that can be addressed > is the absolute CATALOG_DIR which ends up in the /usr/lib/systemd/ > tests/test-catalog binary in the systemd-tests package. > > This dir is currently "useless" in that

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-09 Thread Chris Lamb
Chris Lamb wrote: > (Sorry to be a downer but I wouldn't want to give the impression this > was so "easily" remedied. Alas.) Spent a couple moments on this. The first thing that can be addressed is the absolute CATALOG_DIR which ends up in the /usr/lib/systemd/ tests/test-catalog binary in the

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-09 Thread Chris Lamb
Dear Michael et al., > > ok, FTBR with build path variation.. so the workaround is easy ^^ > > this smells like a simple thing coming from some toolchain Ah, I see. Well, given that the

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-09 Thread Michael Biebl
Am 09.09.18 um 11:49 schrieb Chris Lamb: > Hi Michael, > >> Talking about that on #debian-systemd, h01ger mentioned that this might >> not be too hard. > > Ah, interesting; did Holger have any first steps that would suggest > this? A very quick glance at the diffoscope output and the build logs

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-09 Thread Chris Lamb
Hi Michael, > Talking about that on #debian-systemd, h01ger mentioned that this might > not be too hard. Ah, interesting; did Holger have any first steps that would suggest this? A very quick glance at the diffoscope output and the build logs (you appear to obey our extra reproducibility related

Bug#908365: Package fails to build reproducibly

2018-09-09 Thread Michael Biebl
Source: systemd Version: 239-8 Severity: wishlist User: reproducible-bui...@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: buildpath I notice that systemd fails to build reproducibly [1]. Given the importance of the package I think it would be great if we could fix that. Talking about that on #debian-systemd,