On 3/4/24 22:25, David A. Wheeler via rb-general wrote:
On Mar 4, 2024, at 3:37 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 11:52:07AM -0800, John Gilmore wrote:
Why would these become "wishlist" bugs as opposed to actual reproducibility bugs
that deserve fixing, just because one server
I could see myself supporting this.
It seems appropriate for the weaker term to require more words (thereby
teeing up the opportunity to point out the distinction, which will
remain important to do as part of urging further progress). And this
proposal does fit that criteria!
Cheers!
On
On 28.02.2023 04:15, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 06:11:16PM -0800, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
It also contains forks of some autopkgtest code, last updated in 2017,
if I am reading the git logs correctly. It is apparently no longer
working with current versions of qemu with the
I vaguely recall having a conversation about PGO with an engineer from
Huawei (iirc) at an RB summit several years ago. I think we came to
that same idea -- of AOT determination and simply storing it -- fairly
quickly; and came to no further ideas after prolonged thought.
And though it's
Some of these dreams and the outlines of these concepts have been around
quite a bit longer than this year, even. I think some differential
diagnosis about what makes this draft different, and why it makes the
choices it does, would be useful.
Some things I'd like to see identified and
I get a giggle now and again when the concept of reproducible builds
appears in some other cultural context. Such as this week, in a webcomic!
(Context: steampunk universe; mad geniuses everywhere, generally
building gadgets and then thinking about the consequences later; and at
this moment
On 3/20/19 12:19 PM, Orians, Jeremiah (DTMB) wrote:
In today's world, or you can easily create full containers or at least chroot
sandboxes, those are pretty easy to recreate.
Or a simpler option, fully static binaries like those M2-Planet creates.
https://github.com/oriansj/M2-Planet
Where
On 1/14/19 12:42 PM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
I personally still prefer to _also_ push for single fixes, dropping any
source of possible unreproducibilities.
After all, the build date is totally meaningless in pretty much all
cases I can think of, so getting rid of it completely is only good, and
Folks, if there's something to say about hashes that can be answered by
a quick trip to Wikipedia or your other favorite fount of public
knowledge, please consider doing so... this is discussion, though
liveliness is good, is starting to seem like a significant divergence
from the core
On 26.11.2018 03:00, Bernhard M. Wiedemann wrote:
Hi Hervé,
thanks for raising this topic.
On 26/11/2018 09.08, Hervé Boutemy wrote:
Anybody interested in working together?
With openSUSE we are doing all builds offline to ensure that we can
repeat builds later (without worry about offline or
10 matches
Mail list logo
