| 5 Sep 2024 |
 Kamilla 'ova | In reply to @raboof:matrix.org
yes and no: we have a strong indication that jfsutils sometimes produces a different output (https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/276433), but it's rare enough that I have never actually ran into that when trying to reproduce the ISO * by the way, this problem is most likely caused by the gnu&llvm strip bug, since I can't reproduce this very strange output with dontStrip = true (after 1000+ rebuilds, with dontStrip = false it fails to reproduce under ~300 rebuilds)
and this is the end, my strength was not enough for further debugging :(
| 20:11:28 |
 tpw_rules | reproducibility-focused friends, i have a derivation which uses the arm embedded and the rpi pico toolchain which builds a .bin and a .elf. i'd like to avoid stripping the debug info but the .elf becomes filled with /build/<8 random chars>.o object names which breaks reproducibility. how can i fix it? | 20:37:39 |
| tpw_rules | * reproducibility-focused friends, i have a derivation which uses the arm embedded and the rpi pico toolchain which builds a .bin and a .elf. i'd like to avoid stripping the debug info but the .elf becomes filled with /build/<random chars>.o object names which breaks reproducibility. how can i fix it? | 20:37:58 |
 raboof | In reply to @kamillaova:matrix.org
by the way, this problem is most likely caused by the gnu&llvm strip bug, since I can't reproduce [this](https://reproducible.nixos.org/nixos-iso-minimal-runtime/diff/f6324ec1d2bd8e7eb94aa170221be10b9f59702ddd8c6eda0190dcb70f82e850-bb3de609e45cb1278589282568f7b92cf577c1a69c6aad2efc16f013a94dcceb.html#:~:text=0000000000402480%C2%B7%3C(-,null,-)%3E%3A) _very strange_ output with `dontStrip = true` (after 1000+ rebuilds, with `dontStrip = false` it fails to reproduce under ~300 rebuilds)
and this is the end, my strength was not enough for further debugging :( Yeah thanks for your awesome work on this! Is there any upstream reference to a strip bug? Or are we only observing it here? | 20:38:31 |
| tpw_rules | i can share it if you like but i'm really just looking for the right strip/objdump invocation. the toolchain integration with nixpkgs is slightly broken | 20:38:36 |
| tpw_rules | * i can share it if you like but i'm really just looking for the right strip/objdump invocation. the toolchain integration with nixpkgs is slightly broken so maybe something that's already supposed to handle this doesn't | 20:39:54 |
| tpw_rules | (there might be a compiler flag to add?) | 20:40:01 |
| raboof | I don't know - it might be interesting to consider 'separateDebugInfo' to move the debug info to a separate output that might be less important to have reproducible? | 20:44:35 |
| tpw_rules | it looks like these are FILE entries in the symbol table, i wonder if gcc can be controlled to omit the object names. source names are good | 20:53:00 |
