From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Efraim Flashner Subject: Re: Guix on Debian (was: GSoC ideas) Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 11:16:51 +0200 Message-ID: <20160224111651.06b2c8e2@debian-netbook> References: <20160206113802.GA17867@thebird.nl> <87mvre2eyz.fsf@gnu.org> <87wpqhu0t1.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20160208104530.GA26946@crashnator.suse.cz> <87zivbxggp.fsf@dustycloud.org> <87lh6vx9v0.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20160208204350.GA29053@thebird.nl> <1456268422.2159.23.camel@ghic.org> <8737sj7znl.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20160224000234.GA21278@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; boundary="Sig_/ssK7Uy0=zAnUiFDL=Pz.4OL"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34260) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYVZ9-0004Q8-MV for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 04:17:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYVZ5-0003lv-Ht for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 04:17:03 -0500 Received: from flashner.co.il ([178.62.234.194]:44632) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYVZ5-0003lj-Bw for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 04:16:59 -0500 In-Reply-To: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: guix-devel --Sig_/ssK7Uy0=zAnUiFDL=Pz.4OL Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 10:03:34 +0100 Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > Leo Famulari writes: >=20 > [...] =20 > [...] =20 >=20 > This is correct. Back then we ran into trouble with our Guix > installation at work when someone modified permission bits on the > bootstrap binaries, causing a rebuild of everything. It took us a while > to find out the cause and revert the change. >=20 > Some of the bootstrap binaries can be reproduced from source (if you > make sure to follow the Guix recipes), but others (like Guile IIRC) > don=E2=80=99t have reproducible build systems, so reproducing the exact s= ame > binaries without using Guix is going to be very challenging. >=20 > I don=E2=80=99t know if it is possible and if it would make sense to chea= t, > i.e. just lie to Guix about the hashes of the bootstrap binaries. >=20 > ~~ Ricardo >=20 What about taking it a step further and having a multi-level bootstrap process like when we have the core-updates? If we bootstrap away enough tim= es would we end up with the bootstrap binaries we have now? --=20 Efraim Flashner =D7=90=D7=A4=D7=A8=D7=99=D7=9D = =D7=A4=D7=9C=D7=A9=D7=A0=D7=A8 GPG key =3D A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted --Sig_/ssK7Uy0=zAnUiFDL=Pz.4OL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJWzXUDAAoJEPTB05F+rO6TBngP/1oYyHHbWb0koi7ZGPabQ4Aq Ci0hUEqpSYLCodH0WyzfBwRU1rpwqBkxPAcZB79Tm1bA7aO8IbfFJA9CgG38cNSs FP89HQaNtTbR6tXVwJe04P+DjXR6VHR81gpO+KykDPVIPLytUQ2ZWGK/J5A7pDu/ pD+2SBSAKFVbcHTmMFBogUvlBk5YFb/Vuj1xPPNov5pI/IIzlN8RHm8mmSVsCb/6 JinELsFQ5bYRIfTgtvJWLh3AdyggEoKlhMQ33JMfG9tRlmiJMs+c0GJiFeyYwBMn AICGKloejea5xgFtHQm07aF7YXCJpS6CjxfKbMj2wM/CZ5ImNO3jw1UnP6TxW7d1 K6ym6JS/JrSFOfVI931PhO5abkUKLJXzhHldYnsCIaNNB9FmlwdwgqUFX4uu6t6D WboL+6j2V8zzJFRALYvWwTK6udlZLJe/0MR6komZoUQzaQPSfKMft+4el+G0puND g03seAeBtzltIqhOibhIE3XpQkqW7K6kC06GtGgSWbFjLaOQ6rV7TvMu/KD50MQF 6U8X89GZOBlpuJKBQSE5+QILuPH9eop6rhkcsRvpDThlygVkmw/bzKmCmr7IlSYO yhnmgj/BXvSax141vKDkLh7Vjk6LlOMs2Wng0epduVel/lt+P3m+VSHnqX8ChYz/ yaykWX46ly5bpYxuOJe7 =vQDo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/ssK7Uy0=zAnUiFDL=Pz.4OL--