Re: Status update on reproducible builds in Guix

[Gábor Boskovits]

Yesteday we had a discussion about that on irc.

Here it goes:

[15:15:16] <g_bor> hello guix!

[15:16:01] <g_bor> do we have a proposed way to build pyc files reproducibly?

[15:16:50] <g_bor> I've read in the report, that we are not there yet, but is someone working on it?

[15:17:58] <lfam> g_bor: This is the report you mention? <https://bugs.gnu.org/22533>

[15:18:10] <lfam> I'm not sure if anyone has been working on it since the last message

[15:20:26] * Guest74 has joined #guix

[15:23:05] <g_bor> thx, just what i was looking for.

[15:23:26] <lfam> It's possible that some work in this area is pending on the 'core-updates' Git branch, but I'm not sure

[15:37:41] <mb[m]1> At this stage we might as well wait for this to land upstream: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0552/

So, it seems, that we are waiting for this pep to land upstream.

2017-11-05 16:49 GMT+01:00 Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden>:

Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>
>> Here’s an update on reproducibility in Guix:
>>
>>   https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/news/reproducible-builds-a-status-update.html
>
> At least 78% to possibly 91% reproduciblility of packages is not bad.
>
> Is there a (small) core that is already 100% reprocucible, like the
> installation binaries/USB installer, bare-bones.tmpl or even
> lightweight-desktop.tmpl?

Good question!  I think as soon as you have Python .pyc files in the
dependency graph (reference graph), there are non-reproducible bits.  We
certainly have Python stuff in the base system reference graph, so
that’s one thing we should fix most urgently I guess.

Ludo’.