From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5AE5C02183 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 20:20:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.874291.1285046 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1tYspK-00052G-Uc; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 20:20:22 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 874291.1285046; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 20:20:22 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1tYspK-000529-Rt; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 20:20:22 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 874291; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 20:20:21 +0000 Received: from se1-gles-flk1-in.inumbo.com ([94.247.172.50] helo=se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1tYspJ-000523-0S for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 20:20:21 +0000 Received: from mx1.somlen.de (breeze.somlen.de [2a00:1828:a019::100:0]) by se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 779ba34e-d510-11ef-99a4-01e77a169b0f; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:20:18 +0100 (CET) Received: by mx1.somlen.de with ESMTPSA id 61BA25030C5; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:20:16 +0100 (CET) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" X-Inumbo-ID: 779ba34e-d510-11ef-99a4-01e77a169b0f DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=daemonizer.de; s=202303; t=1737145216; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=U1f/FOsYILpgODc2jCY0Q8D48grq7mgyBUP9Wk8XFUw=; b=Kf7goFDQXxGaNHDTP5iSUiYHdeLuUIwLDBjcUzqqepkZ0eHhCVh+lV6T5JM2V6FQTd8TIp +2aN8l28qOe9Gx68eAXnLNnf+DghJGiRyo/ef0NuH2mwb74k0FSrT2k1hfotGlpVlpU5Cy +Ii8DMLlVxOvtmsdFl2+HmT9OjeL71tLgJt+88XwK2C/gmcBqqcjbhKY7XbeudhcTsmGAp WaThmKUWaLyUDVWqzU9CU1BIBZn0NOfb+98sKbBdYnQoFF4kJywcpp+9jcmBUusPWiWNJP lmGhcGg8fPrPCkcnBnyiOAFS+lQjLcHacKooMJeYr4X5Y6hq9P5PhoJcBeJDZg== From: Maximilian Engelhardt To: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Andrew Cooper Cc: Anthony PERARD Subject: Re: [XEN PATCH 0/1] Bug: Hyperlinks in generated documentation may point to the wrong architecture Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:20:03 +0100 Message-ID: <2013076.usQuhbGJ8B@localhost> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart3528437.QJadu78ljV"; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" --nextPart3528437.QJadu78ljV Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; protected-headers="v1" From: Maximilian Engelhardt Cc: Anthony PERARD Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:20:03 +0100 Message-ID: <2013076.usQuhbGJ8B@localhost> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Freitag, 10. Januar 2025 22:32:06 CET Andrew Cooper wrote: > [...] > Thanks for the patch. I'll commit it in due course. > > As an aside though, is there anything we could sensibly do in our own CI > (Gitlab) to not regress this? > > https://salsa.debian.org/reproducible-builds/reprotest looks like it > might be good start, but I've never really played in this area before. > Would this be suitable, or do you have any other suggestion? Hi Andrew, thanks for merging all my patches. Having some upstream xen testing for reproducible builds would indeed be a good thing to have. Reprotest is the tool the salsa CI currently runs as one step and I also have been using locally for testing. Salsa is the Debian gitlab instance and there is a CI pipeline provided for testing various Debian packaging related things, including reproducibility of the Debian package. We use this pipeline for testing our Debian xen package. There is also the reproducible-builds project which among other things looks at being able to reproduce the whole Debian archive [1], but as far as i know they are using their own tooling for testing. So to answer your question, I would say reprotest is a good tool for testing for reproducibility issues and I don't know any better alternative at the moment. There might be some issues e.g. faketime not working as intended in certain situations, but there is always the option to configure or disable a certain variation if it causes problems. Maxi [1] https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/reproducible.html --nextPart3528437.QJadu78ljV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEQ8gZ7vwsPje0uPkIgepkfSQr0hUFAmeKu3MACgkQgepkfSQr 0hVn7A/+NtVMzQKyKqKSf+2QrgsuVYF1/nj1TueW6iWsSayjGhR1D9fszUo9ZFi+ SZprv668ZPmR40QlmASfqSrAIjxYLrS/yEgWCcZrRd6RSofL8V9zvn3bsX58JJag XIdFr2SDqqM4fu8pTScgGpxL7/pOiUxRUzKIjmHEy9MOmsbr9jpkV/4UPRZ1kSXa r0x/Jvcb0bDTv+zF6hGqjZLUHDx+SWjx5UVpyHZjszupOM2SzaP+ZcZn6ez4E67q /puHmCwGJk+uBQQPn8swkIcX5SGmv4V2BxmalTLFxgMp+uamr7MsQg7wb6fpg91M qCdDOglfZjx0zGqUZripFLq1kocU1AXGHTGamGPlZe4A71G44jCXPqrqujzSke+1 xGExOiXzLScOHyjZiBdbfegoZedYUDkf6W7jf17fVV7CsnIIFErQS0JK1r6PjudJ T0NfKp0X/V0kZDDdCb6mN88iQsdUnjlY4Mdw1+uteRw0poUWYvIzTvOEvOxRWJu8 Wh0Ab+ua1ryT3S/xdwQZbb018Iu1JOW8dBr1BseCDmVGupIn+ws8IU6TjuFBKJNo W/5PK+kt3IdECj40vDXTWRexQUJNv1FJetK2dmWN+5jcoxumI2paeXt/+KYYfH/1 U+yBuPwC9iS1Wdlybo1DuqdG1AY5A9eFG6H1KYwsMw+lV1vzEvI= =nrf+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart3528437.QJadu78ljV--