Re: [Reproducible-builds] New armhf build nodes (Odroid-U3, Cubietruck, OrangePI Plus2)

On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 10:59:58AM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > Apparently had crashed and rebooted to the on-board OS. Hrmpf. Thought I > disabled that, but I'll need to disable it harder, apparently... > > Should be up now! thanks, I could login now and will now continue the setup of

Re: [Reproducible-builds] New armhf build nodes (Odroid-U3, Cubietruck, OrangePI Plus2)

Hi, the nodes are set up now, exist in jenkins and have maintenance and setup jobs configured. Next is to runs those setup jobs and then add build jobs… -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Reproducible-builds

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [buildd-tools-devel] Bug#825991: sbuild: /etc/sbuild/sbuild.conf leaks the user home path

user Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org usertag 825991 toolchain environment thanks -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org

Re: [Reproducible-builds] dropping texlive from our archive

Hi Mattia, thanks for "picking up texlive-bin"…! On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 09:52:43PM +, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > 1+2 were already tried, with very poor results, with both upstream and > debian maintainer not interested at all at even listening to us. I think this summary is too harsh. > I

Re: [Reproducible-builds] new armhf node (OrangePi Plus2)

Hi Vagrant, On Mittwoch, 13. Januar 2016, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > opi2b-armhf-rb.debian.net: > OrangePi Plus2, Allwinner H3 (cortex-a7) quad-core, 2GB ram, ~60GB USB2 > SATA SSD ssh port: 2238 thanks, added to the jenkins setup. Once pbuilder and schroots jobs have been run I'll add builder

Re: [Reproducible-builds] please don't build on archs that packages don't declare support for

Hi Michael, thanks for reaching out to us and reporting this…! On Samstag, 6. Februar 2016, Michael R. Crusoe wrote: > I think you all are the bee's knees. However, some of the packages I > maintain aren't compatible with 32 bit architectures, like armhf, and are > explicitly marked as such.

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: Bug#138409: Bug#138409: Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

Hi Josch, On Donnerstag, 4. Februar 2016, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > (AFAIK transitive build-depends are all possible build depends, > no, that would be the build dependency closure ;) and > > so if a package build depends on python2 || python3 both python versions > > will be part of the

Re: [Reproducible-builds] licencing reproducible/presentations.git

Hi, I forgot to say… On Donnerstag, 4. Februar 2016, Holger Levsen wrote: > but in any case the question is: are you fine to licence your work under > Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License or (at the choice of > the user of the works) under GNU Free Documentation License

Re: [Reproducible-builds] please don't build on archs that packages don't declare support for

Hi, On Dienstag, 9. Februar 2016, Steven Chamberlain wrote: > I think bin/reproducible_build.sh makes a too broad assumption, that > packages producing arch:all parts can build on "any" arch. indeed > dpkg-buildpackage proceeds, I think, because there are arch-indep parts > that 'might' be

Re: [Reproducible-builds] new armhf node (Cubox-i4x4), part 2

Hi, and 3 new armhf builder jobs created…! cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org

Re: [Reproducible-builds] new armhf node (Cubox-i4x4)

Hi Vagrant, On Dienstag, 2. Februar 2016, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > Here's another board, in theory with more ram, but in practice... > cbxi4a-armhf-rb.debian.net: > ssh port: 2239 thanks for setting it up, but: jenkins@jenkins:~$ ssh -v -p 2239 cbxi4a-armhf-rb.debian.net OpenSSH_6.7p1

Re: [Reproducible-builds] new armhf node (Cubox-i4x4)

Hi Vagrant, On Dienstag, 2. Februar 2016, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > Here's another board, in theory with more ram, but in practice... > cbxi4a-armhf-rb.debian.net: added it now. builder jobs coming soon! :) > Technically, this has 4GB of ram, but it's not reconizing all 4GB. Will > work on

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: Bug#138409: Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

Hi, On Sonntag, 31. Januar 2016, Jérémy Bobbio wrote: > A breakdown of the change since the last submitted patch is available > for easier review: > https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/reproducible/dpkg.git/log/?h=pu/buildinfo should we upload a package based on this branch to our repo? cheers,

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

Hi Guillem, just quickly commenting on two sub topics… On Donnerstag, 28. Januar 2016, Guillem Jover wrote: > > One of the main change is that `.buildinfo` should now be named with an > > arbitrary identifier. By default this defaults to $HOSTNAME-$TIMESTAMP > > but can be set to an arbitrary

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

+many thanks for your thorough review! :-) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org

Re: [Reproducible-builds] new armhf node (Cubox-i4x4)

Hi, On Mittwoch, 3. Februar 2016, Holger Levsen wrote: > added it now. builder jobs coming soon! :) added 4 new armhf builder jobs too, but the network connection is still flaky… cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message p

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#815171: Bug#815171: diffoscope: build time tests fail on armhf

Hi Lunar, On Sonntag, 21. Februar 2016, Jérémy Bobbio wrote: > Control: severity -1 normal I dont see why this should be a normal bug, ftbfs are serious by default. Also, as this bug is also present in version 48, it wont affect testing migration, in case you downgraded the severity because

Re: [Reproducible-builds] package uploaded to our repo

Hi, On Samstag, 20. Februar 2016, Reiner Herrmann wrote: > strip-nondeterminism_0.015-1.0~reproducible1.dsc has just been uploaded to shouldnt this go to sid instead? cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#815171: Bug#815171: Bug#815171: Bug#815171: diffoscope: build time tests fail on armhf

Hi, On Montag, 22. Februar 2016, Jérémy Bobbio wrote: > Because it's just a test that is brittle. It doesn't affect normal use > of the installed package and does only prevent a successful build one > times out of ten. only counting version 47+48, it caused 5 build failures out of 5 build

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#815844: Bug#815844: diffoscope won't build without python-magic from PyPi

control: severity -1 minor Hi, downgrading this bugs severity as it doesnt affect Debian as Lunar explained. cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#815171: Bug#815171: Bug#815171: Bug#815171: Bug#815171: diffoscope: build time tests fail on armhf

Dear Lunar, On Mittwoch, 24. Februar 2016, Jérémy Bobbio wrote: > I've removed myself from Uploaders. "wow" :( I'm sorry to have contributed to this. Motivation is a strange thing… I hope you've just decided to scale down / change your involvement in *maintaining* things in a similar spirit

[Reproducible-builds] freedombox pkg set (Re: Bug#814840: tor: Please make build reproducable

Hi Petter, On Montag, 15. Februar 2016, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > The tor package is used in the FreedomBox project, and one long term > goal for me there is to make sure the FreedomBox system is completely > made from reproducable packages. do you have a list of all packages used by the

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Projects and mentors wanted for our participation in upcoming outreach programmes

Hi, On Sonntag, 14. Februar 2016, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote: > Some of you have been waiting for it, and it's finally time: we are looking > for mentors and project ideas for Debian's next participation in outreach > programmes, from May to August 2016. many thanks for doing this once again,

Re: [Reproducible-builds] freedombox pkg set (Re: Bug#814840: tor: Please make build reproducable

Hi Petter, On Dienstag, 16. Februar 2016, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > Thank you very much! I'll pass the information to the freedombox > mailing list. thanks! you can pass on more now… > > I've just noticed that "tor", which triggered this, is not part of this > > package set… :) > Yeah, it

Re: [Reproducible-builds] repro-test (was: Re: Projects and mentors wanted for our participation in upcoming outreach programmes)

Hi, On Donnerstag, 18. Februar 2016, Johannes Schauer wrote: > - I also totally was reading this as re-protest initially and wondered why > I would want to protest again, so I concur with Esa's observation and > conclusion > > - on a second thought, maybe this was intentional :D bingo! :-)

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Projects and mentors wanted for our participation in upcoming outreach programmes

Hi, On Mittwoch, 17. Februar 2016, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > I do want to reorganize my life once again starting from March (new > semester at uni), if I manage to get through the next week, so I'll be > available to co-mentor and help :) yay & good luck! > > what other ideas do you have? > I'd

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Projects and mentors wanted for our participation in upcoming outreach programmes

Hi, On Donnerstag, 18. Februar 2016, Jérémy Bobbio wrote: > > Also, I've mostly copied last years template so far, so I think we should > > update it a bit. > I just did that, tried to capture the different things that people can > do and ideas that were submitted to the list. cool, much nicer

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Projects and mentors wanted for our participation in upcoming outreach programmes

Hi, On Freitag, 19. Februar 2016, Jérémy Bobbio wrote: > In the case of reprotest, I would be happy to help someone write it. But > I don't want to become its primary maintainer after the summer—there's > already to many things that I feel I should attend to. well, then (if someone writes it

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#815171: diffoscope: build time tests fail on armhf

Source: diffoscope Version: 48 Severity: serious Justification: fails to build from source, but built fine in the past User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: ftbfs Hi, diffoscope fails to build from source in unstable/armhf but has successfully built in the past: [..]

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#814696: python-netaddr: ftbfs: `/usr/share/i18n/charmaps': No such file or directory

Hi Vincent, On Sonntag, 14. Februar 2016, Vincent Bernat wrote: > I am not able to reproduce this failure with pbuilder. In the log file, > I see that the "locales" package is not getting installed while it is a > build dependency. locales-all provides locales and is what our pbuilder uses. So

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#814696: python-netaddr: ftbfs: `/usr/share/i18n/charmaps': No such file or directory

Source: python-netaddr Version: 0.7.18-1 Severity: serious Justification: fails to build from source, but built fine in the past User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: ftbfs X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Dear Maintainer, python-netaddr fails to

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#814692: arduino: ftbfs on armhf

Source: arduino Version: 2:1.0.5+dfsg2 Severity: important Tags: sid stretch User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: ftbfs x-debbugs-cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Dear Maintainer, arduino fails to build on armhf, on both stretch and unstable as

Re: [Reproducible-builds] new armhf node (Cubox-i4x4), part 2

Hi Vagrant, On Donnerstag, 11. Februar 2016, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > Upgraded cbxi4a to 3.8GB of ram! yay! (I'll now distribute 8 builders jobs to those with ~4gb, 6 builders for 2gb and 3 for 1gb… for now, we'll see how that goes… (before we had 6 builders for 2gb and 3 for 1gb)) > And

Re: [Reproducible-builds] uploading .buildinfo files… (from Debian reproducible builds…)

Hi Linus, (added the Debian reproducible builds lists to cc:) On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 11:36:56AM +0100, Linus Nordberg wrote: > Do once (per host you're going to submit from): > > alias curl-tor='curl -A "" -x socks4a://127.0.0.1:9050/' that has an result I understand… > curl-tor -O

Re: [Reproducible-builds] uploading .buildinfo files… (from Debian reproducible builds…)

Hi, On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:18:30PM +0100, Linus Nordberg wrote: > That's correct. Let's call it preparation for future verification of > SCT's and STH's. :D (In reality, I forgot adding info about that and > now I've decided to wait until someone asks for it.) ah, ok. > Should've rejected

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [Reproducible] On making Stretch self-contained IRT to reproducibility

Hi, On Mittwoch, 9. März 2016, Julien Cristau wrote: > Most source packages that build both arch:all and arch-dependent > packages will be affected, I believe. Enough that for all practical > purposes, an arch:all binNMU means making things uninstallable, so is a > big no-no. IOW: if a source

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#817248: diffoscope 51 not uploaded to pypi

package: diffoscope version: 51 severity: minor x-debbugs-cc: "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek" Hi, thanks for making us aware of this issue! On Mittwoch, 9. März 2016, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > FYI: I checked why I missed diffscope 49, 50, and 51. > > It seems to

Re: [Reproducible-builds] jenkins.debian.net: [PATCH] Disable download of package descriptions

Hi Vagrant, On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 05:29:41PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > So, basically, nevermind, apparently pbuilder already does this > automatically: [...] > And looks like the builders are using 0.223~bpo8+1, and I checked the > config on one of the builders and it appears to

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [PATCH] Upstreaming a large amount of patches

Hi, On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:33:04AM +0100, Reiner Herrmann wrote: > > [https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2010-07/msg00023.html] > > > > " * WARNING: Future backward-incompatibility! > > " Wildcards are not documented as returning sorted values, but up to and > > " including this

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#814057: update

control: retitle -1 "Add option to ignore mtimes" < deki> jfyi, ctimes are ignored since version 50 -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Applying to Outreachy to work on Reproducible Builds

Hi Val, On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 03:34:33PM -0400, Valerie R Young wrote: > I'm applying to Outreachy (https://www.gnome.org/outreachy/) to work on the > Reproducible Builds project, specifically to improve > test.reproducible-builds.org. Very excited to potential join this project! welcome to

Re: [Reproducible-builds] arm64 reproducible build network

Hi, On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 06:40:09PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > There's about US$1200 left. > > To follow through with number of boards in the original proposal, I > should probably get at least 3-4 more boards... or should we branch out > into an arm64 network with the remaining funds?

Re: [Reproducible-builds] new armhf nodes (Firefly-4gb, BeagleBoard-X15)

Hi Vagrant, On Sonntag, 6. März 2016, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > Ah, looking at: > > https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/reproducible.html > > env DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="parallel=XXX" > DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="parallel=YYY" XXX for amd64: 18 or 17 YYY for amd64: > 17 or 18 (!=

Re: [Reproducible-builds] new armhf nodes (Firefly-4gb, BeagleBoard-X15)

Hi Vagrant, On Donnerstag, 3. März 2016, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > This new board recognizes all 4GB of ram, yay! > > ff4a-armhf-rb.debian.net: > Firefly-RK3288, quad-core rockchip 3288 (A12/A17?), 4GB ram yay indeed & added to jenkins! > Well, got eSATA working finally, so decided to run

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Raspi 3 suitable for arm64? (was: new armhf node (Odroid-XU4))

Hi Axel, On Sonntag, 6. März 2016, Axel Beckert wrote: > I now wonder if a bunch of Raspberry Pi 3 -- since they have 64-bit > CPUs (IIRC an Allwinner A53T) -- would make us able to check > reproducible-builds for Debian arm64, too. as far as I know, yes. Though I would want to use some other

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Number of CPUs for armhf builds

Hi, On Sonntag, 6. März 2016, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > > I'm also pondering to change it to use CPUs+1 for the first builds and > > CPUs for the 2nd ones. > That would be interesting, although I was thinking we might want to do a > fewer number of CPUs on the first build, to make it more likely

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Raspi 3 suitable for arm64?

Hi, as a general comment to the Debian ARM people: thanks a lot for your insightful comments, even though they smashed the idea of cheap arm64 Debian builders for now! Much appreciated feedback! On Sonntag, 6. März 2016, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > That said, I'm not sure how much CPU/board

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Number of CPUs for armhf builds

Hi, On Montag, 7. März 2016, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > Sure, but I suspect there are *some* builds that will never succeed in > under 12 hours with a single CPU core (on the current armhf build > hardware, anyways). I doubt there are many of those, who will manage with dual-cores in 12h,

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Heads-up! (was: [dpkg] 07/07: Document 1.18.5.0~reproducible1)

Hi Lunar, thanks for rebasing our changes on the latest master branch! On Freitag, 4. März 2016, Jérémy Bobbio wrote: > This versions implement changes discussed in #138409. One is that we are > now capturing some environment variables in .buildinfo files. In the > case of

Re: [Reproducible-builds] openSUSE Conference

Hi Christian, On Freitag, 26. Februar 2016, Christian Boltz wrote: > (I'm not subscribed here - please CC me in your replies.) done :) > Is someone interested to give a talk about Reproducible Builds at the > openSUSE Conference (June 22-26 in Nürnberg, Germany)? > > We had some interest in

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Raspi 3 suitable for arm64?

Hi Axel, On Sonntag, 6. März 2016, Axel Beckert wrote: > > I think we'd need 10-12 of such boards for a start, not sure if we still > > have Debian funds to buy those (but I almost think so… Vagrant?) - > > providing we would find someone interested+able to host these. Would you > > (Axel) be

[Reproducible-builds] Subgraph OS pkg sets

Hi, I've just added package sets for Subgraph OS, which is based on Debian stretch, see https://subgraph.com/sgos/ for more info. https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/testing/amd64/pkg_set_subgraph_OS.html and https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/testing/amd64/pkg_set_subgraph_OS_build-

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [Reproducible] On making Stretch self-contained IRT to reproducibility

Hi, On Mittwoch, 24. Februar 2016, Niels Thykier wrote: > The topic of rebuilding all of Stretch to make it self-contained (IRT to > reproducibility) was brought up on the release IRC meeting today (topic > originally proposed in [1]). The highlights: > * To my knowledge, only people from the

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [Reproducible] On making Stretch self-contained IRT to reproducibility

Hi, On Mittwoch, 24. Februar 2016, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 24/02/16 22:16, Niels Thykier wrote: > >- Possible lack of buildd resources to do the rebuild. Notably, due > > to Multi-Arch:same we would generally need to do the rebuild on all > > architectures. > FWIW, that

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#819525: diffoscope must use ruby2.3

package: diffoscope version: 51 severity: important Hi, On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 04:39:05AM +, Debian testing autoremoval watch wrote: > diffoscope 51 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2016-05-04 > > It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs: > 818917: ruby2.2: Replaced by

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Applying to Outreachy to work on Reproducible Builds

Hi Val, On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 10:57:03PM -0400, Valerie R Young wrote: > >(And you should have a local testbed anyway, to be able to develop+test > >your code. As its mostly about the webpages, you also dont need jenkins > >for that nor do you need to be running tests. Just experimenting with >

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#735377: 3.0 (native) silently ignores many binary files by default.

Hi, On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:54:15AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > That's weird, it does work fine here, just checked with git master to > make sure there's been no regressions: we've been seeing the same behavior when uploading diffoscope. When I build it, tests/data/test(1|2).(o|a) are not

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#735377: 3.0 (native) silently ignores many binary files by default.

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 11:15:27AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > DEBUILD_DPKG_BUILDPACKAGE_OPTS="-uc -us -I -i" > > Is this why? > Yes. -I and --tar-ignore in debian/source/options are cumulative. ok, thanks! I've had "-I -i" there for years & have just removed it now, curious what future

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#781262: strip-nondeterminism: remove ar handler now?

Hi, binutils 2.25-6 (which is long in testing + sid) made the build reproducible (#774429). In that course that bug was cloned into #781262, which asks for the ar handler of strip-nondeterminism to be removed. I'm slightly confused now, but (why) is binutils the only package benefitting from

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Permission errors rendering a build unreproducible on reproducible-builds.org

Hi Sean, thanks for caring about reproducible builds and reaching out to us! On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 07:12:32PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > My package ocrmypdf builds reproducibly on my machine. But it fails to > build at all on the reproducible-builds.org cluster. that's actually not quite

[Reproducible-builds] usertag 821356 environment

user reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org usertag 821356 environment thanks -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org

[Reproducible-builds] tails binary and source packages lists URL has changed…

Hi, once again these two URLs have changed: http://nightly.tails.boum.org/build_Tails_ISO_feature-stretch/lastSuccessful/archive/latest.iso.binpkgs http://nightly.tails.boum.org/build_Tails_ISO_feature-stretch/lastSuccessful/archive/latest.iso.srcpkg What are the two new URLs? :) We need to

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [PATCH] Have index_issues also show total popcon scores of each issue

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 04:14:53AM +0200, Ximin Luo wrote: > Oh I forgot to mention, you'll need to install python3-popcon on the machine > running jenkins for it to work. python3-popcon is not yet available in jessie-backports, someone needs to fix this first :-) -- cheers, Holger

[Reproducible-builds] upstream fix

control: forward -1 https://developer.blender.org/rBa18f4d2bc69aa4707fb0efa92d28297d06be060e # I somewhat doubt this works but who knows… :) Hi, upstream has fixed this issue with https://developer.blender.org/rBa18f4d2bc69aa4707fb0efa92d28297d06be060e though I suppose using SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH

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

Hi intrigeri, On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 01:16:28PM +0200, intrigeri wrote: > The ISO build from our feature/stretch branch, that generates these > files, has been broken for a while, and after some weeks our Jenkins > set up deletes artifacts it considers to be obsolete… so these files > have

Re: [Reproducible-builds] getting dpkg ready for reproducible sid

Hi Guillem, On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 01:58:42AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > Ok, so tar 1.29 has just been released and uploaded to Debian. I've > reworked the patch as mentioned above, and will merge it for 1.18.8, > and will do the same for most of the others. awesome news! looking much

[Reproducible-builds] reproducible builds + PIE + bindnow for Stretch?(Re: Time to reevaluate the cost of -fPIC?)

On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 08:13:19PM +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote: > I think the next step could be an archive rebuild with the changed defaults I assume you are talking about a test rebuild here… first, as a next step. I'm replying here now about the "real rebuilds" coming later: reproducible

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Support for --ignore-profile flag in diffoscope

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 12:44:11PM +0200, Ximin Luo wrote: > Concretely I have some suggestions: > > 1. instead of calling this "ignore" we call it "hide". and instead of > "irrelevant" we say "common"/"minor"/"known" strong ACK. I really really like "--hide-timestamps" much better than

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

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.

Re: [Reproducible-builds] LaTeX's \today

Hi Alexis, On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 09:18:01AM +0200, Alexis Bienvenüe wrote: > I (very awkwardly) started something at > https://www.tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/2016-May/038339.html seems you got useful feedback there and your work was generally found useful, yay! Please follow up on those

[Reproducible-builds] linux-grsec: feeding the seed with SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH + usertagging

user reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org usertag 816439 randomness thanks Hi, Dato wrote: > Just FYI, the @grsecurity account tweeted the following today: > > Contrary to: https://bugs.debian.org/816439, RANDSTRUCT is > actually compatible with reproducible builds, just need to

Re: [Reproducible-builds] bpi0 armhf node disk failure

Hi, On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 11:35:07PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > I think bpi0's SSD may be in a very bad state. It's one of the oldest > nodes, so it's no huge surprise to see disk failures there... > > I do have an extra SSD on hand to replace it with, but it will mean a > clean

Re: [Reproducible-builds] LaTeX's \today

Hi Alexis, On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 06:24:10PM +0200, Alexis Bienvenüe wrote: > Looking at debian package canl-c, I saw it uses \today in the > documentation LaTeX files, so that it can't build reproducibly. > I also heard about gle-graphics [1], which has to be patched to give a > fixed value to

[Reproducible-builds] Debian Reproducible builds weekly news URL moved

Hi, you probably will have noted already but in case you haven't: Debian Reproducible Builds Weekly News has moved to a new URL: https://reproducible.alioth.debian.org/blog/ There are RSS and Atom feeds as well: https://reproducible.alioth.debian.org/blog/index.rss

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Blacklist packages for armhf

Hi Vagrant, On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 01:05:23PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > Doing some sql queires and a bit of eyeball heuristics, I've determined > the packages listed below frequently FTBFS due to timeout on armhf. cool, thanks! though… ;-) [...] … I've taken this and changed the

Re: [Reproducible-builds] second i386 build performed on amd64 host without using linux32

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 11:45:09PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi Andreas, > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 03:54:14PM +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > > This was only a problem in the second build, so that pbuilder seems to > > configured differently than the first

[Reproducible-builds] getting dpkg ready for reproducible sid

Hi, so dpkg 1.18.7 was uploaded to sid today and Mattia promply rebased our patches on it and uploaded the following changes to our repo: dpkg (1.18.7.0~reproducible0) UNRELEASED; urgency=low [ Jérémy Bobbio ] * Use a single timestamp for ar headers when building a .deb. * Use the common

Re: [Reproducible-builds] getting dpkg ready for reproducible sid

On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 07:28:30PM +0200, Axel Beckert wrote: > > if (! exists($ENV{SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH_TEX_PRIMITIVES})) { > > $ENV{SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH_TEX_PRIMITIVES} = 1; > It actually has reached Debian about a month ago, but just in > Experimental: >

Re: [Reproducible-builds] bpi0 armhf node disk failure

Hi Vagrant, On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 02:32:24PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > Reinstalled with a new SSD (which has considerably more space for > wear-levelling). > Ready for the jenkins setup scripts to be run on it! cool! installation in progress, should be back building packages rather

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#832962: Bug#832962: reprotest fails to build properly on jessie

On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 02:15:58AM -0400, Holger Levsen wrote: > reprotest 0.2 fails to build properly on jessie, that is, it builds but > the .deb only contains the changelog.gz and copyright. changing the line X-Python3-Version: >= 3.5 in debian/control into X-Python3-Versio

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [PATCH] Improve log note error messages

On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 05:14:09PM +0200, Chris Lamb wrote: > > Attached is the following: > Updated patch attached - I accidentally a verb. Thanks mattia! merged and deployed, thanks! -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Remaining reprotest variations

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 04:58:28PM -0400, Ceridwen wrote: > > Using "setarch uname26" on non-x86 architectures may cause issues > > with recent versions of glibc, too: > All the variations can be disabled at the command line or with a config > file, so anyone using reprotest can disable `kernel`

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#832962: reprotest fails to build properly on jessie

Package: reprotest Version: 0.2 Severity: normal Hi, reprotest 0.2 fails to build properly on jessie, that is, it builds but the .deb only contains the changelog.gz and copyright. On sid it builds fine. I suppose some build depends must be adjusted, eg some versioned depends increased and some

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#832961: reprotest: please add support for building simultaneously

Package: reprotest Severity: wishlist Hi Ceridwen, while reading the very interesting thread about variations for reprotest (=congrats, nice work!), it occurred to me that it would be nice if reprotest could do both tests simultaneously, either - on two different hosts -b1node foo -b1port 4222

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#833340: mini-buildd: please make the build reproducible

user Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org usertag 833340 + Environment Hi, On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 05:20:47PM +0800, Boyuan Yang wrote: > Source: mini-buildd > Version: 1.0.16 > Severity: wishlist > Tags: patch thanks for filing this bug with patch! If you plan to file further such bugs

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#834315: reference for likely causes of this bug

Hi, for future reference: please see https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=735377#44 and followups to learn how this happened and how to prevent it. -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [PATCH] Abstract log functions

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:35:12AM +0200, Chris Lamb wrote: > commit 6997ba002f9bf867d542b58cb00456976e997080 > Author: Chris Lamb > Date: Wed Jul 13 09:34:45 2016 +0200 > > Abstract log functions great, thanks, merged & deployed. -- cheers, Holger

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [PATCH] Abstract log functions

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:35:12AM +0200, Chris Lamb wrote: > Please merge from the "log-functions" branch of > https://github.com/lamby/jenkins.debian.net: > > commit 6997ba002f9bf867d542b58cb00456976e997080 seems you forgot to push? -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description:

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [PATCH] Correct references to RBUILDLOG

Hi Chris, On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 08:50:22AM +0200, Chris Lamb wrote: > Please merge from the "buildlog-rbuildlog" branch of > https://github.com/lamby/jenkins.debian.net. However, not sure > this is correct (is $BUILDLOG supplied by Jenkins? Google suggests > BUILD_LOG is "it's" variable, so

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#787980: status: normalize file permissions when creating control.tar ?

Hi Guillem, (sorry for the late reply…) On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 12:20:44AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > could you please comment briefly on > > your take on this bug and it's status? > > I've had my qualms about the need for this patch, but in any > case the provided patch has not been

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [PATCH] Rename prospects -> potential

Hi Chris, On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 10:55:46PM +0200, Chris Lamb wrote: > commit 047ce047a33ae136d4c3f947f0871bbe9ceee129 > potential -> prospects much better indeed, thanks! (merged+deployed) -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [Popcon-developers] Bug#833695: popularity-contest: http://popcon.debian.org/all-popcon-results.txt.gz containso

reopen 833695 severity 833695 important clone 833695 -1 reassign -1 python-popcon severity -1 normal retitle -1 python-popcon must not crash on invalid data thanks On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 11:34:43AM +0200, Chris Lamb wrote: > > Please reassign to python-popcon. > > Well, there are perhaps two

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#833697: diffoscope: libarchive.exception.ArchiveError when running on two dmg files

On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 12:23:08PM +0200, Chris Lamb wrote: > This is, alas, done inconsistently. Some do it in ``recognizes` (returning > False) and some do it in ``compare_details`` but returning ``[]`` this is annoying and should be fixed. > However, most appear to not catch useful errors.

[Reproducible-builds] status: normalize file permissions when creating control.tar ?

Hi, Guillem, (kudos and thanks for the recent dpkg upload(s)! Glad to see progress with reproducible bits!) could you please comment briefly on your take on this bug and it's status? It's in the BTS since 13 months without a maintainer comment. Thanks! ;-) -- cheers, Holger

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Reproducible patches for libisoburn and libisofs

On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 02:43:49PM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Control via environment is unpopular on my side because it would be > a novelty in the user interface of xorriso. are you sure? I mean, usually stuff like locales and language settings are already taken from the environment…

Re: Reproducing packages in the archive

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 07:35:35PM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > That is: if I run dpkg-buildpackage and post the .deb and .buildinfo > somewhere, do we have a script that takes the .buildinfo as input and > reproduces the .deb? AIUI sbuild can do this. > Once ftp-master publishes .buildinfo

Bug#842250: diffoscope: crashes on NetBSD's base.tgz

On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 04:04:23PM +1300, Chris Lamb wrote: > > $ wget > > https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/netbsd/artifacts/b{1,2}/amd64/binary/sets/base.tgz > > > Holger, can you still reproduce? while on https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/netbsd/netbsd.html the base.tgz looks

Re: [diffoscope] diffoscope commit mails

On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 06:55:20PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > [ dropping r-b-commits@l.a.d.o and using instead r-b@l.a.d.o; the former > is very much not a discussion channel ] agreed & thanks. > > Shouldn't we drop the mails to reproducible-comm...@lists.alioth.debian.org > > and just send

informal meetup at FOSDEM, Saturday 1400

Hi, in the last IRC meeting we decided to have a spontaneous reproducible builds meetup at FOSDEM, on Saturday, at/around 1400 (localtime) in the Cafeteria in between the K and H building. (Its the only food place inside a building on the FOSDEM map.) Provided we find space there I'd suggest to

alioth git mirrors on github

Hi, so we have now some git repos on github which somehow are mirrored from alioth. how does the mirroring work? automatically? manually? how often? (my commits became visible on github several hours after i pushed to alioth…) thanks. -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description:

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   >