Re: Reproducible builds: a means to an end

[ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)]

Alex Vong <alexvong1995@gmail.com> skribis:

> On 16/11/2015, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:

[...]

>> Sometimes there are ready-made patches that can be found in Debian or
>> other distros, sometimes not.  Often they’re hard to find though (for
>> instance, patch-tracker.debian.org seems to be off-line.)
>>
> Yes, according to
> <https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/05/msg00889.html>, the
> maintainer of patch-tracker.debian.org has been missing in action
> until now. I think the website will be off-line in the near future.

OK.

>> “guix challenge” is a simple way to find out which packages are non
>> deterministic.  That’s how I found about those that can be seen at
>> <http://bugs.gnu.org/guix> for example.
>>
> Does that mean we should have a bug report for every non-reproducible
> packages? Or should we only have bug reports for popular packages?

It’s OK to have bug reports for any package, as long as people volunteer
to fix the bugs.  Often it’s a trivial timestamp issue; sometimes it’s
more involved, like <http://bugs.gnu.org/21918>.

Does Debbugs allow us to add custom tags?  We could have a “determinism”
tag to facilitate triage.

Ludo’.