$ strings main | grep ^/ /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 /home/user/main.c
so we tag this buster-ignore and (probably) bullseye-ignore as well
simple workaround: rebuild in recorded path
needs someone to drive $this
93% is a lie. We need infrastructure, processes and policies. (And testing. Currently we only have testing and a vague goal.)
With the upcoming list of bugs we
don't want to fingerpoint at individual teams,
instead I think we can only solve this if we as Debian
decide we want to solve it for buster.
I think this is not happening because people believe
things have been sorted out and we take care of them.
But we are not, we can't do this alone.
93% is a lie.
54% on March 5th 2019.
31% today.
We can still improve this, though 24% (6804) of our source packages have not been uploaded nor binNMUed since December 2016.
I'm not sure I want to / we should upload >5000 source packages in the next 2 years. So mass binNMUs for the rescue?
#869184
sbuild, dput, dpkg: source uploads including _amd64.buildinfo
causes problems
#894441
binNMUs, mtimes and rsync(1)
causes problems and binNMUs should be replaced by easy "no-change-except-debian/changelog-uploads"
blocker for #900837
release.debian.org: Mass-rebuild of packages for reproducible builds"
.buildinfo
files#862073
ftp.debian.org: Please POST .buildinfo files to buildinfo.debian.net
#763822
ftp.debian.org: please include .buildinfo file in the archive
#862538
security.debian.org: Please POST .buildinfo files to buildinfo.debian.net
.buildinfo
filesbuildinfo.debian.net
buildinfos.debian.net
.buildinfo
filesbuildinfo.debian.net: allows submissions from everyone
buildinfos.debian.net: ftp view with pool structure and build date based
.buildinfo
files from an unofficial service?there should be a debian.org machine serving .buildinfo
files to the public.
since December 2016: 965333 files in total, eg 118195 amd64 related.
12 GB files, 4 GB links.
#863622
apt: warn when installing packages that are not reproducible
that would be great for bullseye, but...
the goal should be to not install nor to run unreproducible software.
in-toto (see Lukas' talk before) brings this to the next level...
results saved in common database
json for Debian, openSUSE, Arch Linux, OpenWrt, Alpine
shared notes, cross distro links
two kinds of tests: CI tests (like we have now) and tests against what's on "ftp.(debian|archlinux|...).org"
the 'reproducibly in theory but not in practice' release
the 'we could be reproducible but we are not' release?
the 'we are almost there but still haven't sorted out...' release???
the release is still far away and we haven't frozen yet! :-)