Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:50:05 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> To: tech-lists <tech-lists@zyxst.net> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r350550 - head/share/mk Message-ID: <201908072050.x77Ko5QD089298@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <20190807201448.GA42725@bastion.zyxst.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Hello, > > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 04:56:14PM +0000, Glen Barber wrote: > > >I would like to request this commit be reverted. While the original > >commit message to enable this knob stated the commit would be reverted > >after stable/12 branched, I have seen no public complaints about > >enabling REPRODUCIBLE_BUILD by default (and quite honestly, do not see > >the benefit of disabling it by default -- why wouldn't we want > >reproducibility?). > > > >To me, this feels like a step backwards, with no tangible benefit. > >Note, newvers.sh does properly detect a modified tree if it can find > >the VCS metadata directory (i.e., .git, .svn) -- I know this because > >I personally helped with it. > > > >In my opinion, those that want the non-reproducible metadata included in > >output from 'uname -a' should set WITHOUT_REPRODUCIBLE_BUILDS in their > >src.conf. Turning off a sane default for the benefit of what I suspect > >is likely a short list of use cases feels like a step in the wrong > >direction. > > Well, my use case is that I have some machines that follow 12-stable. > > I'm not a developer. But I keep an eye on things like security bulletins > etc and when they come out it usually gives something like 'affecting > 12-STABLE prior to r<number> something like that. And I can easily look > at uname -a to see if this or that 12-stable machine needs to be patched > or whatever. That is, if reproductible_build is turned off. (or > without_reproductible_build is turned on) > > Or if I mail to stable@ asking for help I'll want to say *exactly* what > sources I've built from. And sometimes someone will say "oh that was > fixed after r<suchandsuch>" and so I'll grab sources after that revision > if I can and fix the problem. > > But like I say I'm not a dev. I'd guess, though, that lots of non-devs > use the revision info if they follow -stable, so if I'm right in thinking > this, it'd be a short list of use cases but lots of affected people. > > unless there's another way to get the svn rev number? > > Why turn off this functionality by default? > -- > J. Actually you have a very good point here. Let me raise the issue, the rXXXXXX is infact reproducible, why is that being excluded from reproducible builds? If I build from the same source at the same version I get the same rXXXXX string in the resulting file. This is reproducible. So WHY are we excluding rXXXXXX from the reproducible build? -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201908072050.x77Ko5QD089298>