On Thu, 05 Apr 2018 12:14:53 +0200 Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> wrote:
> Björn Höfling <bjoern.hoefl...@bjoernhoefling.de> writes: > > > And you mentioned different environment conditions like machine and > > kernel. We still have "only" 70-90% reproducibility. > > Where does that number come from? In my tests for a non-trivial set > of bioinfo pipelines I got to 97.7% reproducibility (or 95.2% if you > include very minor problems) for 355 direct inputs. > > I rebuilt on three different machines. I have no own numbers but checked Ludivic's blog post from October 2017: https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/blog/2017/reproducible-builds-a-status-update/ "We’re somewhere between 78% and 91%—not as good as Debian yet, [..]". So if your numbers are valid for the whole repository, that is good news and would mean we are now better than Debian [1], and that would be worth a new blog post. Björn [1] https://isdebianreproducibleyet.com/
pgpeuErPwY55u.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
