From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: Bootstrap binaries Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 00:19:04 +0100 Message-ID: <87oab3ys9j.fsf@gnu.org> References: <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> <20160224111651.06b2c8e2@debian-netbook> <20160224093658.GA28873@novena-choice-citizen.lan> <878u284pxq.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <87wppsedu2.fsf@dustycloud.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38071) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aZRfC-00034L-Fp for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 18:19:11 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aZRf9-0000mJ-9g for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 18:19:10 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87wppsedu2.fsf@dustycloud.org> (Christopher Allan Webber's message of "Thu, 25 Feb 2016 12:26:29 -0800") 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: Christopher Allan Webber Cc: guix-devel Christopher Allan Webber skribis: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > >> Jookia <166291@gmail.com> skribis: >> >>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:16:51AM +0200, Efraim Flashner wrote: >>>> 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 enoug= h times >>>> would we end up with the bootstrap binaries we have now? >>> >>> From what I understand the bootstrap binaries aren't reproducible yet. >> >> Depends on what kind of reproducibility we=E2=80=99re talking about. It= =E2=80=99s >> simple to build bootstrap binaries: >> >> https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/html_node/Bootstrapping.html#= Building-the-Bootstrap-Binaries >> >> I think they are all bit-for-bit reproducible (that is, you can use >> --rounds=3D3 and everything is fine), except for Guile due to >> .) >> >> However, if you build them today, you=E2=80=99ll obviously get something >> different from the bootstrap binaries we currently use, which were from >> Guile 2.0.9, libc 2.19, GCC 4.7.2, some old Coreutils, etc. >> >> HTH, >> Ludo=E2=80=99. > > It seems like a good idea, once that bug in Guile is fixed, to move over > to a new set of bootstrap binaries... even if this involves some > difficulty for Guix users today. It would certainly be a good thing to > do before we hit 1.0, whenever that is. I prefer to change those binaries as rarely as possible. Intuitively (and unscientifically), it gives more confidence to keep using the same old binaries wrt. Ken Thompson attacks. Ludo=E2=80=99.