From: Ian Eure <ian@retrospec.tv>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com>
Cc: 71121@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#71121] [PATCH 2/3] gnu: librewolf: Rebuild source tarball
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2024 09:30:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <871q5gvcys.fsf@meson> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87plt3e9yf.fsf@gmail.com>
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> writes:
> Hi Ian,
>
> Ian Eure <ian@retrospec.tv> writes:
>
>> Hi Maxim,
>>
>> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Hi Ian,
>>>
>>> Ian Eure <ian@retrospec.tv> writes:
>>>
>>>> * gnu/packages/librewolf.scm (librewolf): This patch removes
>>>> an
>>>> intermediate
>>>> step in the build chain. The upstream source tarball is
>>>> created
>>>> with an
>>>> automated build process, where Firefox sources are fetched,
>>>> patched, and
>>>> repacked. Rather than download the output of that process,
>>>> as the
>>>> package has
>>>> been, it’s now replicated within the build process, similar
>>>> to how
>>>> IceCat
>>>> works.
>>>
>>> I think I'd rather keep using a human-prepared and vetted
>>> tarball,
>>> to
>>> avoid anything going stale in our local recipe of how it's
>>> meant to
>>> be
>>> prepared.
>>>
>>
>> The upstream tarball is built by scripts run under a CI system
>> which
>> triggers when changes are pushed[1], and aren’t human-prepared
>> or
>> vetted in the same way that many release tarballs have
>> tradionally
>> been. This patchset uses the same script as upstream, with
>> modifications to make it reproduceable, as the upstream process
>> isn’t.
>
> Perhaps the modifications to make it reproducible could be
> shared to
> upstream? We'd benefit all thee users of librewolf this way,
> not only
> Guix ones.
>
Yes, I plan to work with upstream on this. The current
modifications are Guix-specific, but I believe a mechanism which
allows for both better upstream reproducability and less hacky
Guix packaging is possible.
>> As noted in the commit messages, IceCat also builds this
>> way[2],
>> including patching the upstream build script[3][4], so this
>> seems like
>> a reasonable & accepted way to build. Though perhaps there’s
>> dissatisfaction with the IceCat build which I wasn’t aware of,
>> being a
>> fairly new contributor.
>
> The "dissatisfaction", if we can call it that, was about
> Linux-libre,
> and voiced by some a few years ago, including the project
> maintainers,
> if I recall correctly. The idea of linux-libre is to shield
> users from
> blobs. In this sense it is valuable that they don't even have
> to touch
> the pristine blobbed (there are a few array-defined firmwares in
> the
> tree still, at least one old Apple one IIRC) Linux source, which
> is
> considered problematic for some from a GNU FSDG perspective.
>
Gotcha. I agree that these are unlikely to apply here.
Thank you for pushing this, and I’ll try to get commit messages
closer to the convention in the future.
— Ian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-01 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-22 14:53 [bug#71121] [PATCH 0/3] Update LibreWolf to 126.0-1 [security fixes] Ian Eure
2024-05-22 14:59 ` [bug#71121] [PATCH 1/3] gnu: all-mozilla-locales: Add Santali locale; make public Ian Eure
2024-05-22 14:59 ` [bug#71121] [PATCH 2/3] gnu: librewolf: Rebuild source tarball Ian Eure
2024-05-30 1:30 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2024-05-30 1:48 ` Ian Eure
2024-05-30 12:54 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2024-06-01 16:30 ` Ian Eure [this message]
2024-05-22 14:59 ` [bug#71121] [PATCH 3/3] gnu: librewolf: Update to 126.0-1 Ian Eure
2024-05-30 22:39 ` [bug#71121] [PATCH v2 1/3] gnu: all-mozilla-locales: Add Santali locale; make public Ian Eure
2024-05-30 22:39 ` [bug#71121] [PATCH v2 2/3] gnu: librewolf: Rebuild source tarball Ian Eure
2024-05-30 22:39 ` [bug#71121] [PATCH v2 3/3] gnu: librewolf: Update to 126.0-1 Ian Eure
2024-06-01 11:33 ` bug#71121: " Maxim Cournoyer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=871q5gvcys.fsf@meson \
--to=ian@retrospec.tv \
--cc=71121@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).