On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 05:04:54PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > On 2020-06-17, Holger Levsen wrote: > > interesting findings! > > > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:03:24PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > >> > Many of them appear to go from FTBFS to reproducible, FWIW. > > > > nice. what is your general recommendation/plan for the next action item > > here? > Well, the FTBFS would be if we enable the flag, so not exactly *nice*
I was referring to the low number of ftbfs and the fact that we have that
data now.
> ... but at least it's identified issues as opposed to unknowns.
exactlty.
> I'm not as confident about the data as my initial response in this
> thread (e.g. made some false assumptions at first) ... but we do have
> more data now, and we're looking at hunreds of packages building
> reproducibly vs. tens of packages FTBFS.
is there anything which can be done to increase your confidence?
> Personally a little shy about posting to debian-devel; I don't normally
> follow it at all.
just prepare a mail in a new thread to *this* list, and cc: -devel?! ;)
> Maybe we should also bring the dpkg folks back into the thread (or are
> they subscribed and still here? :)
Guillem replied in this thread three weeks ago, so I'm assuming he's reading
this list. :)
--
cheers,
Holger
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Reproducible-builds mailing list [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
