4 ms·

Debian developers have been working on Reproducible Builds for a number of years[0]. Currently the Debian amd64 distribution is ~93.7% reproducible[1]. It's pos

by maheart 10y ago

Debian developers have been working on Reproducible Builds for a number of years[0]. Currently the Debian amd64 distribution is ~93.7% reproducible[1]. It's possible that Debian amd64 systems will be fully reproducible in Stretch+1 (~2-3 years). [0] https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds [1] https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/reproducible.html https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/reproducible.ht...

ymse 10y ago
GNU Guix is also working towards full reproducibility, and has an up-to-date (but incomplete) list at https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/packages/reproducibility.html https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/packages/reproducibility.h...
gwu78 10y ago
The Debian wiki page appears to be about reproducible builds for packages. The NetBSD wiki entry is about progress on reproducible builds for tools, kernel and userland. As for packages, reproducible builds under pkgsrc is still a WIP. My use of third party binary packages and pkgsrc is minimal but I am continually building custom kernels and crunched binaries with build.sh and I do make use of the binary userlands from releng. For me at least, having reproducible builds for these alone is quite useful.
- throwaway2048 10y ago
  On debian tools, kernel and userland are packages.
  - gwu78 10y ago
    I should have guessed. I use their libc6 package for q)k) under /emul/linux and in the past the live.debian.org images occasionally but that is about as much as I know about Debian. Apologies for my ignorance.
qznc 10y ago
93% of the distribution could be enough for almost everybody or for nearly nobody if some core packages are not reproducible yet. Is there any data on that? Maybe using the Debian popcon data?
listic 10y ago
How come it's 93.7%? Doesn't look like it on the graph[0].
- maheart 10y ago
  That's for the "unstable" repo. I was quoting for the "testing" repo (see [1]).

by maheart 10y ago

ymse 10y ago

GNU Guix is also working towards full reproducibility, and has an up-to-date (but incomplete) list at https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/packages/reproducibility.html https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/packages/reproducibility.h...

gwu78 10y ago

The Debian wiki page appears to be about reproducible builds for packages. The NetBSD wiki entry is about progress on reproducible builds for tools, kernel and userland. As for packages, reproducible builds under pkgsrc is still a WIP. My use of third party binary packages and pkgsrc is minimal but I am continually building custom kernels and crunched binaries with build.sh and I do make use of the binary userlands from releng. For me at least, having reproducible builds for these alone is quite useful.

throwaway2048 10y ago
On debian tools, kernel and userland are packages.
- gwu78 10y ago
  I should have guessed. I use their libc6 package for q)k) under /emul/linux and in the past the live.debian.org images occasionally but that is about as much as I know about Debian. Apologies for my ignorance.

qznc 10y ago

93% of the distribution could be enough for almost everybody or for nearly nobody if some core packages are not reproducible yet. Is there any data on that? Maybe using the Debian popcon data?

listic 10y ago

How come it's 93.7%? Doesn't look like it on the graph[0].

maheart 10y ago
That's for the "unstable" repo. I was quoting for the "testing" repo (see [1]).