| 1 Jul 2021 |
 Synthetica | Yeah, I want a "no-really-build-this-even-if-you-think-you-already-have-it" flag | 16:45:57 |
| Synthetica | maybe a bit less verbose | 16:46:02 |
 siraben | Boss level: https://github.com/ligurio/unreliablefs | 17:23:24 |
 raboof | nix-build '<nixpkgs>' -A mypackage && nix-build '<nixpkgs>' -A mypackage --check? ;) | 17:31:42 |
| siraben | --check is nice but barely adds variation to the build setup | 17:45:22 |
| siraben | I want to be able to automatically test on different kernels and at different times somehow | 17:45:42 |
 afontain | In reply to @siraben:matrix.org
Boss level: https://github.com/ligurio/unreliablefs that's like disorderfs, but much more evil | 17:48:19 |
| afontain | I'd expect many software not to be able to survive this | 17:48:35 |
| siraben | radiation hardening time | 17:51:09 |
| siraben | level Cthulhu: survive the van Allen belt | 17:52:16 |
 fzakaria (Old) | I posted that I like git's model of allowing subcommands so people can create their own.
It lets you have very ergonomic naming commands | 17:54:42 |
| fzakaria (Old) | (git searches for any tool on $PATH that is prefixd with git-) | 17:54:50 |
| fzakaria (Old) | something like:
nix verify-reproducible <PACKAGE> [--repeat 0] sounds a lot better | 17:55:15 |
| fzakaria (Old) | When it does repeat, losing all the previous attempts was frustrating; but i'm being nitpicky | 17:56:18 |
| fzakaria (Old) | --check was pretty good | 17:56:23 |
| 2 Jul 2021 |
|  @irenes:matrix.org joined the room. | 09:21:34 |
|  immae (he/him) changed their display name from immae (he/him) to immae. | 17:46:04 |
| immae (he/him) changed their profile picture. | 17:46:14 |
| immae (he/him) changed their profile picture. | 17:47:53 |
 @obfusk:matrix.org | In reply to @siraben:matrix.org
It should be easier for people to check reproducibility of their own packages as well Debian's gitlab (salsa) CI has a default reprotest job. something like that would be nice. | 18:38:10 |
|  immae joined the room. | 18:42:42 |
| immae (he/him) left the room. | 22:02:59 |
| 4 Jul 2021 |
| siraben | Does the reproducibility patches lead to slower binary performance? | 11:23:48 |
 Rick (Mindavi) | Some do, like the python patches that disable optimized builds and disabling gcc profile guided optimization | 11:49:27 |
| Rick (Mindavi) | I think there are some wins to be had with making those reproducible as well, but that's quite involved | 11:50:01 |
| Rick (Mindavi) | And requires intricate knowledge of the code and tooling, so that requires effort upstream | 11:50:54 |
| Rick (Mindavi) | Which leads to some discussion since PGO does help quite a bit | 11:59:44 |
 davidak | >The NixOS Linux distribution pulled off a technical and publicity coup this month by announcing that the ISO_minimal.x86_64-Linux image is 100% reproducible. The announcement was widely discussed on Hacker News, where the article has received in excess of 200 comments.
https://reproducible-builds.org/reports/2021-06/ | 16:44:32 |
 andi- | Is it just me or is that worded a bit odd? | 17:49:27 |
 bryan | It's unnatural English, if that's what you mean. :) Maybe not written by a native speaker? | 17:50:59 |
