5 ms·
It’s a well-defined term though https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducible_builds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducible_builds
by Semaphor 6y ago
It’s a well-defined term though
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducible_builds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducible_builds
- cesaref 6y agoWell I think that's the crux of the issue, i've been using the term reproducible build to mean something different for the last 25 years. I'm after functional equivalence not binary equivalence. Now it might be impossible to guarantee one without the other, but that's all I care about.
- m463 6y agothat is a good page: The GNU project used reproducible builds in the early 1990s. Changelogs from 1992 indicate the ongoing effort. [4] One of the older[5] projects to promote reproducible builds is the Bitcoin project with Gitian. Later, in 2013, the Tor (anonymity network) project started using Gitian for their reproducible builds.[6] In July 2013 on the Debian project started implementing reproducible builds across its entire package archive.[7][8] By July 2017 more than 90% of the packages in the repository have been proven to build reproducibly.[9] In November 2018, the Reproducible Builds project joined the Software Freedom Conservancy.[10] F-droid uses reproducible builds to provide a guarantee that the distributed APKs use the claimed free source code.[11