From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id 2JfQKKY6sV6xAwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 05 May 2020 10:06:30 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id cLvqDLE6sV4LEQAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 05 May 2020 10:06:41 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142::17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 044B39400E4 for ; Tue, 5 May 2020 10:06:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:38508 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVuTI-00031d-HG for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 05 May 2020 06:06:40 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56556) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVuT7-00031V-RL for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 May 2020 06:06:29 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:50939) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVuT7-0005DA-IK; Tue, 05 May 2020 06:06:29 -0400 Received: from [2a01:e0a:1d:7270:af76:b9b:ca24:c465] (port=55950 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jVuT1-0001DX-Fc; Tue, 05 May 2020 06:06:28 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Konrad Hinsen Subject: Re: unexpected reproducibility of reproducible blog post? References: X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 17 =?utf-8?Q?Flor=C3=A9al?= an 228 de la =?utf-8?Q?R?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Date: Tue, 05 May 2020 12:06:22 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Konrad Hinsen's message of "Mon, 04 May 2020 15:50:29 +0200") Message-ID: <874ksun1b5.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Guix Devel Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Scanner: scn0 X-Spam-Score: 1.49 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 2001:470:142::17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Scan-Result: default: False [1.49 / 13.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; GENERIC_REPUTATION(0.00)[-0.49545964089668]; MX_INVALID(1.00)[cached]; DWL_DNSWL_FAIL(0.00)[2001:470:142::17:server fail]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2001:470:142::/48:c]; IP_REPUTATION_HAM(0.00)[asn: 22989(0.13), country: US(-0.00), ip: 2001:470:142::17(-0.50)]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MAILLIST(-0.20)[mailman]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[fastmail.net]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_FAIL(0.00)[2001:470:142::17:server fail]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:22989, ipnet:2001:470:142::/48, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[larch=yhetil.org]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[ludo@gnu.org,guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; URIBL_BLOCKED(0.00)[fastmail.net:email,gnu.org:url]; FORGED_RECIPIENTS_MAILLIST(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[gnu.org]; HAS_LIST_UNSUB(-0.01)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; FORGED_SENDER_MAILLIST(0.00)[] X-TUID: X6xr2Wu/2akd Hi, Konrad Hinsen skribis: > I looked a bit at grafts. The documentation at > > https://guix.gnu.org/manual/en/html_node/Security-Updates.html > > isn't very explicit about the reproducibility of grafts. In particular, > it doesn't say if a package containing patched binaries retains its > original hash, or receives a new unique one. With a unique hash, grafts > would just be a tweak in the build system, and no less reproducible than > standard builds. It looks like I have to dive into the source code to > find out! Grafts are normal derivations, and they=E2=80=99re deterministic: it=E2=80= =99s just about replacing a set of strings by another set of strings. On the implementation, see also . I=E2=80=99m also preparing a post of the recent (pre-1.1.0) changes in that area. Ludo=E2=80=99.