Search Results: "Santiago Vila"

9 January 2025

Reproducible Builds: Reproducible Builds in December 2024

Welcome to the December 2024 report from the Reproducible Builds project! Our monthly reports outline what we ve been up to over the past month and highlight items of news from elsewhere in the world of software supply-chain security when relevant. As ever, however, if you are interested in contributing to the Reproducible Builds project, please visit our Contribute page on our website. Table of contents:
  1. reproduce.debian.net
  2. debian-repro-status
  3. On our mailing list
  4. Enhancing the Security of Software Supply Chains
  5. diffoscope
  6. Supply-chain attack in the Solana ecosystem
  7. Website updates
  8. Debian changes
  9. Other development news
  10. Upstream patches
  11. Reproducibility testing framework

reproduce.debian.net Last month saw the introduction of reproduce.debian.net. Announced at the recent Debian MiniDebConf in Toulouse, reproduce.debian.net is an instance of rebuilderd operated by the Reproducible Builds project. rebuilderd is our server designed monitor the official package repositories of Linux distributions and attempts to reproduce the observed results there. This month, however, we are pleased to announce that not only does the service now produce graphs, the reproduce.debian.net homepage itself has become a start page of sorts, and the amd64.reproduce.debian.net and i386.reproduce.debian.net pages have emerged. The first of these rebuilds the amd64 architecture, naturally, but it also is building Debian packages that are marked with the no architecture label, all. The second builder is, however, only rebuilding the i386 architecture. Both of these services were also switched to reproduce the Debian trixie distribution instead of unstable, which started with 43% of the archive rebuild with 79.3% reproduced successfully. This is very much a work in progress, and we ll start reproducing Debian unstable soon. Our i386 hosts are very kindly sponsored by Infomaniak whilst the amd64 node is sponsored by OSUOSL thank you! Indeed, we are looking for more workers for more Debian architectures; please contact us if you are able to help.

debian-repro-status Reproducible builds developer kpcyrd has published a client program for reproduce.debian.net (see above) that queries the status of the locally installed packages and rates the system with a percentage score. This tool works analogously to arch-repro-status for the Arch Linux Reproducible Builds setup. The tool was packaged for Debian and is currently available in Debian trixie: it can be installed with apt install debian-repro-status.

On our mailing list On our mailing list this month:
  • Bernhard M. Wiedemann wrote a detailed post on his long journey towards a bit-reproducible Emacs package. In his interesting message, Bernhard goes into depth about the tools that they used and the lower-level technical details of, for instance, compatibility with the version for glibc within openSUSE.
  • Shivanand Kunijadar posed a question pertaining to the reproducibility issues with encrypted images. Shivanand explains that they must use a random IV for encryption with AES CBC. The resulting artifact is not reproducible due to the random IV used. The message resulted in a handful of replies, hopefully helpful!
  • User Danilo posted an in interesting question related to their attempts in trying to achieve reproducible builds for Threema Desktop 2.0. The question resulted in a number of replies attempting to find the right combination of compiler and linker flags (for example).
  • Longstanding contributor David A. Wheeler wrote to our list announcing the release of the Census III of Free and Open Source Software: Application Libraries report written by Frank Nagle, Kate Powell, Richie Zitomer and David himself. As David writes in his message, the report attempts to answer the question what is the most popular Free and Open Source Software (FOSS)? .
  • Lastly, kpcyrd followed-up to a post from September 2024 which mentioned their desire for someone to implement a hashset of allowed module hashes that is generated during the kernel build and then embedded in the kernel image , thus enabling a deterministic and reproducible build. However, they are now reporting that somebody implemented the hash-based allow list feature and submitted it to the Linux kernel mailing list . Like kpcyrd, we hope it gets merged.

Enhancing the Security of Software Supply Chains: Methods and Practices Mehdi Keshani of the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands has published their thesis on Enhancing the Security of Software Supply Chains: Methods and Practices . Their introductory summary first begins with an outline of software supply chains and the importance of the Maven ecosystem before outlining the issues that it faces that threaten its security and effectiveness . To address these:
First, we propose an automated approach for library reproducibility to enhance library security during the deployment phase. We then develop a scalable call graph generation technique to support various use cases, such as method-level vulnerability analysis and change impact analysis, which help mitigate security challenges within the ecosystem. Utilizing the generated call graphs, we explore the impact of libraries on their users. Finally, through empirical research and mining techniques, we investigate the current state of the Maven ecosystem, identify harmful practices, and propose recommendations to address them.
A PDF of Mehdi s entire thesis is available to download.

diffoscope diffoscope is our in-depth and content-aware diff utility that can locate and diagnose reproducibility issues. This month, Chris Lamb made the following changes, including preparing and uploading versions 283 and 284 to Debian:
  • Update copyright years. [ ]
  • Update tests to support file 5.46. [ ][ ]
  • Simplify tests_quines.py::test_ differences,differences_deb to simply use assert_diff and not mangle the test fixture. [ ]

Supply-chain attack in the Solana ecosystem A significant supply-chain attack impacted Solana, an ecosystem for decentralised applications running on a blockchain. Hackers targeted the @solana/web3.js JavaScript library and embedded malicious code that extracted private keys and drained funds from cryptocurrency wallets. According to some reports, about $160,000 worth of assets were stolen, not including SOL tokens and other crypto assets.

Website updates Similar to last month, there was a large number of changes made to our website this month, including:
  • Chris Lamb:
    • Make the landing page hero look nicer when the vertical height component of the viewport is restricted, not just the horizontal width.
    • Rename the Buy-in page to Why Reproducible Builds? [ ]
    • Removing the top black border. [ ][ ]
  • Holger Levsen:
  • hulkoba:
    • Remove the sidebar-type layout and move to a static navigation element. [ ][ ][ ][ ]
    • Create and merge a new Success stories page, which highlights the success stories of Reproducible Builds, showcasing real-world examples of projects shipping with verifiable, reproducible builds. These stories aim to enhance the technical resilience of the initiative by encouraging community involvement and inspiring new contributions. . [ ]
    • Further changes to the homepage. [ ]
    • Remove the translation icon from the navigation bar. [ ]
    • Remove unused CSS styles pertaining to the sidebar. [ ]
    • Add sponsors to the global footer. [ ]
    • Add extra space on large screens on the Who page. [ ]
    • Hide the side navigation on small screens on the Documentation pages. [ ]

Debian changes There were a significant number of reproducibility-related changes within Debian this month, including:
  • Santiago Vila uploaded version 0.11+nmu4 of the dh-buildinfo package. In this release, the dh_buildinfo becomes a no-op ie. it no longer does anything beyond warning the developer that the dh-buildinfo package is now obsolete. In his upload, Santiago wrote that We still want packages to drop their [dependency] on dh-buildinfo, but now they will immediately benefit from this change after a simple rebuild.
  • Holger Levsen filed Debian bug #1091550 requesting a rebuild of a number of packages that were built with a very old version of dpkg.
  • Fay Stegerman contributed to an extensive thread on the debian-devel development mailing list on the topic of Supporting alternative zlib implementations . In particular, Fay wrote about her results experimenting whether zlib-ng produces identical results or not.
  • kpcyrd uploaded a new rust-rebuilderd-worker, rust-derp, rust-in-toto and debian-repro-status to Debian, which passed successfully through the so-called NEW queue.
  • Gioele Barabucci filed a number of bugs against the debrebuild component/script of the devscripts package, including:
    • #1089087: Address a spurious extra subdirectory in the build path.
    • #1089201: Extra zero bytes added to .dynstr when rebuilding CMake projects.
    • #1089088: Some binNMUs have a 1-second offset in some timestamps.
  • Gioele Barabucci also filed a bug against the dh-r package to report that the Recommends and Suggests fields are missing from rebuilt R packages. At the time of writing, this bug has no patch and needs some help to make over 350 binary packages reproducible.
  • Lastly, 8 reviews of Debian packages were added, 11 were updated and 11 were removed this month adding to our knowledge about identified issues.

Other development news In other ecosystem and distribution news:
  • Lastly, in openSUSE, Bernhard M. Wiedemann published another report for the distribution. There, Bernhard reports about the success of building R-B-OS , a partial fork of openSUSE with only 100% bit-reproducible packages. This effort was sponsored by the NLNet NGI0 initiative.

Upstream patches The Reproducible Builds project detects, dissects and attempts to fix as many currently-unreproducible packages as possible. We endeavour to send all of our patches upstream where appropriate. This month, we wrote a large number of such patches, including:

Reproducibility testing framework The Reproducible Builds project operates a comprehensive testing framework running primarily at tests.reproducible-builds.org in order to check packages and other artifacts for reproducibility. In November, a number of changes were made by Holger Levsen, including:
  • reproduce.debian.net-related:
    • Add a new i386.reproduce.debian.net rebuilder. [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]
    • Make a number of updates to the documentation. [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]
    • Run i386.reproduce.debian.net run on a public port to allow external workers. [ ]
    • Add a link to the /api/v0/pkgs/list endpoint. [ ]
    • Add support for a statistics page. [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]
    • Limit build logs to 20 MiB and diffoscope output to 10 MiB. [ ]
    • Improve the frontpage. [ ][ ]
    • Explain that we re testing arch:any and arch:all on the amd64 architecture, but only arch:any on i386. [ ]
  • Misc:
    • Remove code for testing Arch Linux, which has moved to reproduce.archlinux.org. [ ][ ]
    • Don t install dstat on Jenkins nodes anymore as its been removed from Debian trixie. [ ]
    • Prepare the infom08-i386 node to become another rebuilder. [ ]
    • Add debug date output for benchmarking the reproducible_pool_buildinfos.sh script. [ ]
    • Install installation-birthday everywhere. [ ]
    • Temporarily disable automatic updates of pool links on buildinfos.debian.net. [ ]
    • Install Recommends by default on Jenkins nodes. [ ]
    • Rename rebuilder_stats.py to rebuilderd_stats.py. [ ]
    • r.d.n/stats: minor formatting changes. [ ]
    • Install files under /etc/cron.d/ with the correct permissions. [ ]
and Jochen Sprickerhof made the following changes: Lastly, Gioele Barabucci also classified packages affected by 1-second offset issue filed as Debian bug #1089088 [ ][ ][ ][ ], Chris Hofstaedtler updated the URL for Grml s dpkg.selections file [ ], Roland Clobus updated the Jenkins log parser to parse warnings from diffoscope [ ] and Mattia Rizzolo banned a number of bots and crawlers from the service [ ][ ].
If you are interested in contributing to the Reproducible Builds project, please visit our Contribute page on our website. However, you can get in touch with us via:

2 January 2025

Colin Watson: Free software activity in December 2024

Most of my Debian contributions this month were sponsored by Freexian, as well as one direct donation via Liberapay (thanks!). OpenSSH I issued a bookworm update with a number of fixes that had accumulated over the last year, especially fixing GSS-API key exchange which was quite broken in bookworm. base-passwd A few months ago, the adduser maintainer started a discussion with me (as the base-passwd maintainer) and the shadow maintainer about bringing all three source packages under one team, since they often need to cooperate on things like user and group names. I agreed, but hadn t got round to doing anything about it until recently. I ve now officially moved it under team maintenance. debconf Gioele Barabucci has been working on eliminating duplicated code between debconf and cdebconf, ultimately with the goal of migrating to cdebconf (which I m not sure I m convinced of as a goal, but if we can make improvements to both packages as part of working towards it then there s no harm in that). I finally got round to reviewing and merging confmodule changes in each of debconf and cdebconf. This caused an installer regression due to a weirdness in cdebconf-udeb s packaging, which I fixed - sorry about that! I ve also been dealing with a few patch submissions that had been in my queue for a long time, but more on that next month if all goes well. CI issues I noticed and fixed a problem with Restrictions: needs-sudo in autopkgtest. I fixed broken aptly images in the Salsa CI pipeline. Python team Last month, I mentioned some progress on sorting out the multipart vs. python-multipart name conflict in Debian (#1085728), and said that I thought we d be able to finish it soon. I was right! We got it all done this month: The Python 3.13 transition continues, and last month we were able to add it to the supported Python versions in testing. (The next step will be to make it the default.) I fixed lots of problems in aid of this, including: Sphinx 8.0 removed some old intersphinx_mapping syntax which turned out to still be in use by many packages in Debian. The fixes for this were individually trivial, but there were a lot of them: I found that twisted 24.11.0 broke tests in buildbot and wokkel, and fixed those. I packaged python-flatdict, needed for a new upstream version of python-semantic-release. I tracked down a test failure in vdirsyncer (which I ve been using for some years, but had never previously needed to modify) and contributed a fix upstream. I fixed some packages to tolerate future versions of dh-python that will drop their dependency on python3-setuptools: I fixed django-cte to remove a build-dependency on the obsolete python3-nose package. I added Django 5.1 support to django-polymorphic. (There are a number of other packages that still need work here.) I fixed various other build/test failures: I upgraded these packages to new upstream versions: I updated the team s library style guide to remove material related to Python 2 and early versions of Python 3, which is no longer relevant to any current Python packaging work. Other Python upstream work I happened to notice a Twisted upstream issue requesting the removal of the deprecated twisted.internet.defer.returnValue, realized it was still used in many places in Debian, and went on a PR-filing spree informed by codesearch to try to reduce the future impact of such a change on Debian: Other small fixes Santiago Vila has been building the archive with make --shuffle (also see its author s explanation). I fixed associated bugs in cccc (contributed upstream), groff, and spectemu. I backported an upstream patch to putty to fix undefined behaviour that affected use of the small keypad . I removed groff s Recommends: libpaper1 (#1091375, #1091376), since it isn t currently all that useful and was getting in the way of a transition to libpaper2. I filed an upstream bug suggesting better integration in this area.

2 March 2022

Antoine Beaupr : procmail considered harmful

TL;DR: procmail is a security liability and has been abandoned upstream for the last two decades. If you are still using it, you should probably drop everything and at least remove its SUID flag. There are plenty of alternatives to chose from, and conversion is a one-time, acceptable trade-off.

Procmail is unmaintained procmail is unmaintained. The "Final release", according to Wikipedia, dates back to September 10, 2001 (3.22). That release was shipped in Debian since then, all the way back from Debian 3.0 "woody", twenty years ago. Debian also ships 25 uploads on top of this, with 3.22-21 shipping the "3.23pre" release that has been rumored since at least the November 2001, according to debian/changelog at least: 
procmail (3.22-1) unstable; urgency=low
  * New upstream release, which uses the  standard' format for Maildir
    filenames and retries on name collision. It also contains some
    bug fixes from the 3.23pre snapshot dated 2001-09-13.
  * Removed  sendmail' from the Recommends field, since we already
    have  exim' (the default Debian MTA) and  mail-transport-agent'.
  * Removed suidmanager support. Conflicts: suidmanager (<< 0.50).
  * Added support for DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS in the source package.
  * README.Maildir: Do not use locking on the example recipe,
    since it's wrong to do so in this case.
 -- Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org>  Wed, 21 Nov 2001 09:40:20 +0100
All Debian suites from buster onwards ship the 3.22-26 release, although the maintainer just pushed a 3.22-27 release to fix a seven year old null pointer dereference, after this article was drafted. Procmail is also shipped in all major distributions: Fedora and its derivatives, Debian derivatives, Gentoo, Arch, FreeBSD, OpenBSD. We all seem to be ignoring this problem. The upstream website (http://procmail.org/) has been down since about 2015, according to Debian bug #805864, with no change since. In effect, every distribution is currently maintaining its fork of this dead program. Note that, after filing a bug to keep Debian from shipping procmail in a stable release again, I was told that the Debian maintainer is apparently in contact with the upstream. And, surprise! they still plan to release that fabled 3.23 release, which has been now in "pre-release" for all those twenty years. In fact, it turns out that 3.23 is considered released already, and that the procmail author actually pushed a 3.24 release, codenamed "Two decades of fixes". That amounts to 25 commits since 3.23pre some of which address serious security issues, but none of which address fundamental issues with the code base.

Procmail is insecure By default, procmail is installed SUID root:mail in Debian. There's no debconf or pre-seed setting that can change this. There has been two bug reports against the Debian to make this configurable (298058, 264011), but both were closed to say that, basically, you should use dpkg-statoverride to change the permissions on the binary. So if anything, you should immediately run this command on any host that you have procmail installed on: 
dpkg-statoverride --update --add root root 0755 /usr/bin/procmail
Note that this might break email delivery. It might also not work at all, thanks to usrmerge. Not sure. Yes, everything is on fire. This is fine. In my opinion, even assuming we keep procmail in Debian, that default should be reversed. It should be up to people installing procmail to assign it those dangerous permissions, after careful consideration of the risk involved. The last maintainer of procmail explicitly advised us (in that null pointer dereference bug) and other projects (e.g. OpenBSD, in [2]) to stop shipping it, back in 2014. Quote:
Executive summary: delete the procmail port; the code is not safe and should not be used as a basis for any further work.
I just read some of the code again this morning, after the original author claimed that procmail was active again. It's still littered with bizarre macros like: 
#define bit_set(name,which,value) \
  (value?(name[bit_index(which)] =bit_mask(which)):\
  (name[bit_index(which)]&=~bit_mask(which)))
... from regexp.c, line 66 (yes, that's a custom regex engine). Or this one: 
#define jj  (aleps.au.sopc)
It uses insecure functions like strcpy extensively. malloc() is thrown around gotos like it's 1984 all over again. (To be fair, it has been feeling like 1984 a lot lately, but that's another matter entirely.) That null pointer deref bug? It's fixed upstream now, in this commit merged a few hours ago, which I presume might be in response to my request to remove procmail from Debian. So while that's nice, this is the just tip of the iceberg. I speculate that one could easily find an exploitable crash in procmail if only by running it through a fuzzer. But I don't need to speculate: procmail had, for years, serious security issues that could possibly lead to root privilege escalation, remotely exploitable if procmail is (as it's designed to do) exposed to the network. Maybe I'm overreacting. Maybe the procmail author will go through the code base and do a proper rewrite. But I don't think that's what is in the cards right now. What I expect will happen next is that people will start fuzzing procmail, throw an uncountable number of bug reports at it which will get fixed in a trickle while never fixing the underlying, serious design flaws behind procmail.

Procmail has better alternatives The reason this is so frustrating is that there are plenty of modern alternatives to procmail which do not suffer from those problems. Alternatives to procmail(1) itself are typically part of mail servers. For example, Dovecot has its own LDA which implements the standard Sieve language (RFC 5228). (Interestingly, Sieve was published as RFC 3028 in 2001, before procmail was formally abandoned.) Courier also has "maildrop" which has its own filtering mechanism, and there is fdm (2007) which is a fetchmail and procmail replacement. Update: there's also mailprocessing, which is not an LDA, but processing an existing folder. It was, however, specifically designed to replace complex Procmail rules. But procmail, of course, doesn't just ship procmail; that would just be too easy. It ships mailstat(1) which we could probably ignore because it only parses procmail log files. But more importantly, it also ships:
  • lockfile(1) - conditional semaphore-file creator
  • formail(1) - mail (re)formatter
lockfile(1) already has a somewhat acceptable replacement in the form of flock(1), part of util-linux (which is Essential, so installed on any normal Debian system). It might not be a direct drop-in replacement, but it should be close enough. formail(1) is similar: the courier maildrop package ships reformail(1) which is, presumably, a rewrite of formail. It's unclear if it's a drop-in replacement, but it should probably possible to port uses of formail to it easily.
Update: the maildrop package ships a SUID root binary (two, even). So if you want only reformail(1), you might want to disable that with: 
dpkg-statoverride --update --add root root 0755 /usr/bin/lockmail.maildrop 
dpkg-statoverride --update --add root root 0755 /usr/bin/maildrop
It would be perhaps better to have reformail(1) as a separate package, see bug 1006903 for that discussion.
The real challenge is, of course, migrating those old .procmailrc recipes to Sieve (basically). I added a few examples in the appendix below. You might notice the Sieve examples are easier to read, which is a nice added bonus.

Conclusion There is really, absolutely, no reason to keep procmail in Debian, nor should it be used anywhere at this point. It's a great part of our computing history. May it be kept forever in our museums and historical archives, but not in Debian, and certainly not in actual release. It's just a bomb waiting to go off. It is irresponsible for distributions to keep shipping obsolete and insecure software like this for unsuspecting users. Note that I am grateful to the author, I really am: I used procmail for decades and it served me well. But now, it's time to move, not bring it back from the dead.

Appendix

Previous work It's really weird to have to write this blog post. Back in 2016, I rebuilt my mail setup at home and, to my horror, discovered that procmail had been abandoned for 15 years at that point, thanks to that LWN article from 2010. I would have thought that I was the only weirdo still running procmail after all those years and felt kind of embarrassed to only "now" switch to the more modern (and, honestly, awesome) Sieve language. But no. Since then, Debian shipped three major releases (stretch, buster, and bullseye), all with the same vulnerable procmail release. Then, in early 2022, I found that, at work, we actually had procmail installed everywhere, possibly because userdir-ldap was using it for lockfile until 2019. I sent a patch to fix that and scrambled to remove get rid of procmail everywhere. That took about a day. But many other sites are now in that situation, possibly not imagining they have this glaring security hole in their infrastructure.

Procmail to Sieve recipes I'll collect a few Sieve equivalents to procmail recipes here. If you have any additions, do contact me. All Sieve examples below assume you drop the file in ~/.dovecot.sieve.

deliver mail to "plus" extension folder Say you want to deliver user+foo@example.com to the folder foo. You might write something like this in procmail: 
MAILDIR=$HOME/Maildir/
DEFAULT=$MAILDIR
LOGFILE=$HOME/.procmail.log
VERBOSE=off
EXTENSION=$1            # Need to rename it - ?? does not like $1 nor 1
:0
* EXTENSION ?? [a-zA-Z0-9]+
        .$EXTENSION/
That, in sieve language, would be: 
require ["variables", "envelope", "fileinto", "subaddress"];
########################################################################
# wildcard +extension
# https://doc.dovecot.org/configuration_manual/sieve/examples/#plus-addressed-mail-filtering
if envelope :matches :detail "to" "*"  
  # Save name in $ name  in all lowercase
  set :lower "name" "$ 1 ";
  fileinto "$ name ";
  stop;

Subject into folder This would file all mails with a Subject: line having FreshPorts in it into the freshports folder, and mails from alternc.org mailing lists into the alternc folder: 
:0
## mailing list freshports
* ^Subject.*FreshPorts.*
.freshports/
:0
## mailing list alternc
* ^List-Post.*mailto:.*@alternc.org.*
.alternc/
Equivalent Sieve: 
if header :contains "subject" "FreshPorts"  
    fileinto "freshports";
  elsif header :contains "List-Id" "alternc.org"  
    fileinto "alternc";

Mail sent to root to a reports folder This double rule: 
:0
* ^Subject: Cron
* ^From: .*root@
.rapports/
Would look something like this in Sieve: 
if header :comparator "i;octet" :contains "Subject" "Cron"  
  if header :regex :comparator "i;octet"  "From" ".*root@"  
        fileinto "rapports";
Note that this is what the automated converted does (below). It's not very readable, but it works.

Bulk email I didn't have an equivalent of this in procmail, but that's something I did in Sieve: 
if header :contains "Precedence" "bulk"  
    fileinto "bulk";

Any mailing list This is another rule I didn't have in procmail but I found handy and easy to do in Sieve: 
if exists "List-Id"  
    fileinto "lists";

This or that I wouldn't remember how to do this in procmail either, but that's an easy one in Sieve: 
if anyof (header :contains "from" "example.com",
           header :contains ["to", "cc"] "anarcat@example.com")  
    fileinto "example";
You can even pile up a bunch of options together to have one big rule with multiple patterns: 
if anyof (exists "X-Cron-Env",
          header :contains ["subject"] ["security run output",
                                        "monthly run output",
                                        "daily run output",
                                        "weekly run output",
                                        "Debian Package Updates",
                                        "Debian package update",
                                        "daily mail stats",
                                        "Anacron job",
                                        "nagios",
                                        "changes report",
                                        "run output",
                                        "[Systraq]",
                                        "Undelivered mail",
                                        "Postfix SMTP server: errors from",
                                        "backupninja",
                                        "DenyHosts report",
                                        "Debian security status",
                                        "apt-listchanges"
                                        ],
           header :contains "Auto-Submitted" "auto-generated",
           envelope :contains "from" ["nagios@",
                                      "logcheck@",
                                      "root@"])
     
    fileinto "rapports";

Automated script There is a procmail2sieve.pl script floating around, and mentioned in the dovecot documentation. It didn't work very well for me: I could use it for small things, but I mostly wrote the sieve file from scratch.

Progressive migration Enrico Zini has progressively migrated his procmail setup to Sieve using a clever way: he hooked procmail inside sieve so that he could deliver to the Dovecot LDA and progressively migrate rules one by one, without having a "flag day". See this explanatory blog post for the details, which also shows how to configure Dovecot as an LMTP server with Postfix.

Other examples The Dovecot sieve examples are numerous and also quite useful. At the time of writing, they include virus scanning and spam filtering, vacation auto-replies, includes, archival, and flags.

Harmful considered harmful I am aware that the "considered harmful" title has a long and controversial history, being considered harmful in itself (by some people who are obviously not afraid of contradictions). I have nevertheless deliberately chosen that title, partly to make sure this article gets maximum visibility, but more specifically because I do not have doubts at this moment that procmail is, clearly, a bad idea at this moment in history.

Developing story I must also add that, incredibly, this story has changed while writing it. This article is derived from this bug I filed in Debian to, quite frankly, kick procmail out of Debian. But filing the bug had the interesting effect of pushing the upstream into action: as mentioned above, they have apparently made a new release and merged a bunch of patches in a new git repository. This doesn't change much of the above, at this moment. If anything significant comes out of this effort, I will try to update this article to reflect the situation. I am actually happy to retract the claims in this article if it turns out that procmail is a stellar example of defensive programming and survives fuzzing attacks. But at this moment, I'm pretty confident that will not happen, at least not in scope of the next Debian release cycle.

3 May 2017

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible Builds: week 105 in Stretch cycle

Here's what happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between Sunday April 23 and Saturday April 29 2017: Past and upcoming events On April 26th Chris Lamb gave a talk at foss-north 2017 in Gothenburg, Sweden on Reproducible Builds. Between May 5th-7th the Reproducible Builds Hackathon 2017 will take place in Hamburg, Germany. Then on May 26th Bernhard M. Wiedemann will give a talk titled reproducible builds in openSUSE (2017) at the openSUSE Conference 2017 in N rnberg, Germany. Media coverage Already on April 19th Sylvain Beucler wrote a yet another follow-up post Practical basics of reproducible builds 3, after part 1 and part 2 of his series. Toolchain development and fixes Michael Woerister of the Rust project has implemented file maps that affect all path-related compiler information, including "error messages, metadata, debuginfo, and the file!() macro alike". Ximin Luo with support from some other Rust developers and contributors helped steer the final result into something that was compatible with reproducible builds. Many thanks to all involved, especially for the patience of discussing this over several months. Ximin wrote a first-attempt patch to fix R build-path issues. It made 460/477 R packages reproducible, but also caused 3 of these to FTBFS. See randomness_in_r_rdb_rds_databases for details. Bugs filed and patches sent upstream Chris Lamb: Bernhard M. Wiedemann filed a number of patches upstream: Reviews of unreproducible packages 102 package reviews have been added, 64 have been updated and 24 have been removed in this week, adding to our knowledge about identified issues. 3 issue types have been updated: Weekly QA work During our reproducibility testing, FTBFS bugs have been detected and reported by: diffoscope development diffoscope 82 was uploaded to experimental by Chris Lamb. It included contributions from: Changes from previous weeks that were also released with 82: Misc. This week's edition was written by Ximin Luo, Chris Lamb and Holger Levsen & reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible Builds folks on IRC & the mailing lists.

5 December 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible Builds: week 84 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between Sunday November 27 and Saturday December 3 2016: Reproducible work in other projects Media coverage, etc. Bugs filed Chris Lamb: Clint Adams: Dafydd Harries: Daniel Shahaf: Reiner Herrmann: Valerie R Young: Reviews of unreproducible packages 15 package reviews have been added, 4 have been updated and 26 have been removed in this week, adding to our knowledge about identified issues. 2 issue types have been added: Weekly QA work During our reproducibility testing, some FTBFS bugs have been detected and reported by: diffoscope development Is is available now in Debian, Archlinux and on PyPI. strip-nondeterminism development reprotest development tests.reproducible-builds.org Misc. This week's edition was written by Chris Lamb, Valerie Young, Vagrant Cascadian, Holger Levsen and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible Builds folks on IRC.

24 October 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible Builds: week 78 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between Sunday October 16 and Saturday October 22 2016: Media coverage Upcoming events buildinfo.debian.net In order to build packages reproducibly, you not only need identical sources but also some external definition of the environment used for a particular build. This definition includes the inputs and the outputs and, in the Debian case, are available in a $package_$architecture_$version.buildinfo file. We anticipate the next dpkg upload to sid will create .buildinfo files by default. Whilst it's clear that we also need to teach dak to deal with them (#763822) its not actually clear how to handle .buildinfo files after dak has processed them and how to make them available to the world. To this end, Chris Lamb has started development on a proof-of-concept .buildinfo server to see what issues arise. Source Reproducible work in other projects Packages reviewed and fixed, and bugs filed Reviews of unreproducible packages 99 package reviews have been added, 3 have been updated and 6 have been removed in this week, adding to our knowledge about identified issues. 6 issue types have been added: Weekly QA work During of reproducibility testing, some FTBFS bugs have been detected and reported by: diffoscope development tests.reproducible-builds.org Misc. Our poll to find a good time for an IRC meeting is still running until Tuesday, October 25st; please reply as soon as possible. We need a logo! Some ideas and requirements for a Reproducible Builds logo have been documented in the wiki. Contributions very welcome, even if simply by forwarding this information. This week's edition was written by Chris Lamb & Holger Levsen and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible Builds folks on IRC.

16 October 2016

Thomas Goirand: Released OpenStack Newton, Moving OpenStack packages to upstream Gerrit CI/CD

OpenStack Newton is released, and uploaded to Sid OpenStack Newton was released on the Thursday 6th of October. I was able to upload nearly all of it before the week-end, though there was a bit of hick-ups still, as I forgot to upload python-fixtures 3.0.0 to unstable, and only realized it thanks to some bug reports. As this is a build time dependency, it didn t disrupt Sid users too much, but 38 packages wouldn t build without it. Thanks to Santiago Vila for pointing at the issue here. As of writing, a lot of the Newton packages didn t migrate to Testing yet. It s been migrating in a very messy way. I d love to improve this process, but I m not sure how, if not filling RC bugs against 250 packages (which would be painful to do), so they would migrate at once. Suggestions welcome. Bye bye Jenkins For a few years, I was using Jenkins, together with a post-receive hook to build Debian Stable backports of OpenStack packages. Though nearly a year and a half ago, we had that project to build the packages within the OpenStack infrastructure, and use the CI/CD like OpenStack upstream was doing. This is done, and Jenkins is gone, as of OpenStack Newton. Current status As of August, almost all of the packages Git repositories were uploaded to OpenStack Gerrit, and the build now happens in OpenStack infrastructure. We ve been able to build all packages a release OpenStack Newton Debian packages using this system. This non-official jessie backports repository has also been validated using Tempest. Goodies from Gerrit and upstream CI/CD It is very nice to have it built this way, so we will be able to maintain a full CI/CD in upstream infrastructure using Newton for the life of Stretch, which means we will have the tools to test security patches virtually forever. Another thing is that now, anyone can propose packaging patches without the need for an Alioth account, by sending a patch for review through Gerrit. It is our hope that this will increase the likeliness of external contribution, for example from 3rd party plugins vendors (ie: networking driver vendors, for example), or upstream contributors themselves. They are already used to Gerrit, and they all expected the packaging to work this way. They are all very much welcome. The upstream infra: nodepool, zuul and friends
The OpenStack infrastructure has been described already in planet.debian.org, by Ian Wienand. So I wont describe it again, he did a better job than I ever would. How it works All source packages are stored in Gerrit with the deb- prefix. This is in order to avoid conflict with upstream code, and to easily locate packaging repositories. For example, you ll find Nova packaging under https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/deb-nova. Two Debian repositories are stored in the infrastructure AFS (Andrew File System, which means a copy of that repository exist on each cloud were we have compute resources): one for the actual deb-* builds, under jessie-newton , and one for the automatic backports, maintained in the deb-auto-backports gerrit repository. We re using a git tag based workflow. Every Gerrit repository contains all of the upstream branch, plus a debian/newton branch, which contains the same content as a tag of upstream, plus the debian folder. The orig tarball is generated using git archive , then used by sbuild to produce binaries. To package a new upstream release, one simply needs to git merge -X theirs FOO (where FOO is the tag you want to merge), then edit debian/changelog so that the Debian package version matches the tag, then do git commit -a amend , and simply git review . At this point, the OpenStack CI will build the package. If it builds correctly, then a core reviewer can approve the merge commit , the patch is merged, then the package is built and the binary package published on the OpenStack Debian package repository. Maintaining backports automatically The automatic backports is maintained through a Gerrit repository called deb-auto-backports containing a packages-list file that simply lists source packages we need to backport. On each new CR (change request) in Gerrit, thanks to some madison-lite and dpkg compare-version magic, the packages-list is used to compare what s in the Debian archive and what we have in the jessie-newton-backports repository. If the version is lower in our repository, or if the package doesn t exist, then a build is triggered. There is the possibility to backport from any Debian release (using the -d flag in the packages-list file), and even we can use jessie-backports to just rebuild the package. I also had to write a hack to just download from jessie-backports without rebuilding, because rebuilding the webkit2gtk package (needed by sphinx) was taking too resources (though we ll try to never use it, and rebuild packages when possible). The nice thing with this system, is that we don t need to care much about maintaining packages up-to-date: the script does that for us. Upstream Debian repository are NOT for production The produced package repositories are there because we have interconnected build dependencies, needed to run unit test at build time. It is the only reason why such Debian repository exist. They are not for production use. If you wish to deploy OpenStack, we very much recommend using packages from distributions (like Debian or Ubuntu). Indeed, the infrastructure Debian repositories are updated multiple times daily. As a result, it is very likely that you will experience failures to download (hash or file size mismatch and such). Also, the functional tests aren t yet wired in the CI/CD in OpenStack infra, and therefore, we cannot guarantee yet that the packages are usable. Improving the build infrastructure There s a bunch of things which we could do to improve the build process. Let me give a list of things we want to do. Generalizing to Debian During Debconf 16, I had very interesting talks with the DSA (Debian System Administrator) about deploying such a CI/CD for the whole of the Debian archive, interfacing Gerrit with something like dgit and a build CI. I was told that I should provide a proof of concept first, which I very much agreed with. Such a PoC is there now, within OpenStack infra. I very much welcome any Debian contributor to try it, through a packaging patch. If you wish to do so, you should read how to contribute to OpenStack here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/How_To_Contribute#If_you.27re_a_developer and then simply send your patch with git review . This system, however, currently only fits the git tag based packaging workflow. We d have to do a little bit more work to make it possible to use pristine-tar (basically, allow to push in the upstream and pristine-tar branches without any CI job connected to the push). Dear DSA team, as we now nice PoC that is working well, on which the OpenStack PKG team is maintaining 100s of packages, shall we try to generalize and provide such infrastructure for every packaging team and DDs?

26 September 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible Builds: week 74 in Stretch cycle

Here is what happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between Sunday September 18 and Saturday September 24 2016: Outreachy We intend to participate in Outreachy Round 13 and look forward for new enthusiastic applications to contribute to reproducible builds. We're offering four different areas to work on: Reproducible Builds World summit #2 We are planning e a similar event to our Athens 2015 summit and expect to reveal more information soon. If you haven't been contacted yet but would like to attend, please contact holger. Toolchain development and fixes Mattia uploaded dpkg/1.18.10.0~reproducible1 to our experimental repository. and covered the details for the upload in a mailing list post. The most important change is the incorporation of improvements made by Guillem Jover (dpkg maintainer) to the .buildinfo generator. This is also in the hope that it will speed up the merge in the upstream. One of the other relevant changes from before is that .buildinfo files generated from binary-only builds will no longer include the hash of the .dsc file in Checksums-Sha256 as documented in the specification. Even if it was considered important to include a checksum of the source package in .buildinfo, storing it that way breaks other assumptions (eg. that Checksums-Sha256 contains only files part of that are part of a single upload, wheras the .dsc might not be part of that upload), thus we look forward for another solution to store the source checksum in .buildinfo. Bugs filed Reviews of unreproducible packages 250 package reviews have been added, 4 have been updated and 4 have been removed in this week, adding to our knowledge about identified issues. 4 issue types have been added: 3 issue types have been updated: Weekly QA work FTBFS bugs have been reported by: Documentation updates h01ger created a new Jenkins job so that every commit pushed to the master branch for the website will update reproducible-builds.org. diffoscope development strip-nondeterminism development reprotest development tests.reproducible-builds.org Misc. This week's edition was written by Chris Lamb, Holger Levsen and Mattia Rizzolo and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible Builds folks on IRC.

20 September 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible Builds: week 73 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between Sunday September 11 and Saturday September 17 2016: Toolchain developments Ximin Luo started a new series of tools called (for now) debrepatch, to make it easier to automate checks that our old patches to Debian packages still apply to newer versions of those packages, and still make these reproducible. Ximin Luo updated one of our few remaining patches for dpkg in #787980 to make it cleaner and more minimal. The following tools were fixed to produce reproducible output: Packages reviewed and fixed, and bugs filed The following updated packages have become reproducible - in our current test setup - after being fixed: The following updated packages appear to be reproducible now, for reasons we were not able to figure out. (Relevant changelogs did not mention reproducible builds.) The following 3 packages were not changed, but have become reproducible due to changes in their build-dependencies: jaxrs-api python-lua zope-mysqlda. Some uploads have addressed some reproducibility issues, but not all of them: Patches submitted that have not made their way to the archive yet: Reviews of unreproducible packages 462 package reviews have been added, 524 have been updated and 166 have been removed in this week, adding to our knowledge about identified issues. 25 issue types have been updated: Weekly QA work FTBFS bugs have been reported by: diffoscope development A new version of diffoscope 60 was uploaded to unstable by Mattia Rizzolo. It included contributions from: It also included from changes previous weeks; see either the changes or commits linked above, or previous blog posts 72 71 70. strip-nondeterminism development New versions of strip-nondeterminism 0.027-1 and 0.028-1 were uploaded to unstable by Chris Lamb. It included contributions from: disorderfs development A new version of disorderfs 0.5.1 was uploaded to unstable by Chris Lamb. It included contributions from: It also included from changes previous weeks; see either the changes or commits linked above, or previous blog posts 70. Misc. This week's edition was written by Ximin Luo and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible Builds folks on IRC.

28 August 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible builds: week 70 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between Sunday August 21 and Saturday August 27 2016: GSoC and Outreachy updates Packages reviewed and fixed, and bugs filed Reviews of unreproducible packages 10 package reviews have been added and 6 have been updated this week, adding to our knowledge about identified issues. A large number of issue types have been updated: Weekly QA work 29 FTBFS bugs have been reported by: diffoscope development Holger also created another test job for diffoscope on jenkins.debian.net, so that now also all commits to branches other than master are being tested. strip-nondeterminism development strip-nondeterminism 0.023-1 was uploaded by Chris Lamb: 
 * Support Android .apk files with the JAR normalizer.
 * handlers/png.pm: Drop unused Archive::Zip import
 * Remove hyphen from non-determinism and non-deterministic.
 * javaproperties.pm: Match more styles of .properties and loosen filename matching.
 * Improve tests:
   - Make fixture runner generic to all normalizer types.
   - Replace (single) pearregistry test with a fixture.
   - Set a canonical time for fixture tests.
   - Add gzip testcase fixture.
   - Replace t/javadoc.t with fixture
   - Replace t/ar.t with a fixture.
   - t/javaproperties: move pom.properties and version.properties tests to fixtures
   - t/fixtures.t: move to using subtests
   - t/fixtures.t: Explicitly test that we can find a normalizer
   - t/fixtures.t: Don't run normalizer if we didn't find one.
strip-nondeterminism 0.023-2 uploaded by Mattia Rizzolo to allow stderr in autopkgtest. disorderfs development tests.reproducible-builds.org Debian: Somewhat related to reproducible builds there has been a first Debian jenkins team maintainance meeting on the #debian-qa IRC channel, to discuss current issues with the setup and to start the work of migrating jenkins.debian.net to jenkins.debian.org. The next meeting will take place on September 28th 2016 at 19 UTC. Misc. This week's edition was written by Chris Lamb and Holger Levsen and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible Builds folks on IRC.

23 August 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible Builds: week 69 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between Sunday August 14 and Saturday August 20 2016: Fasten your seatbelts Important note: we enabled build path variation for unstable now, so your package(s) might become unreproducible, while previously it was said to be reproducible given a specific build path it probably still is reproducible but read on for the details below in the tests.reproducible-builds.org section! As said many times: this is still research and we are working to make it reality. Media coverage Daniel Stender blogged about python packaging and explained some caveats regarding reproducible builds. Toolchain developments Thomas Schmitt uploaded xorriso which now obeys SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH. As stated in its man pages: 
ENVIRONMENT
[...]
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH  belongs to the specs of reproducible-builds.org.  It
is supposed to be either undefined or to contain a decimal number which
tells the seconds since january 1st 1970. If it contains a number, then
it is used as time value to set the  default  of  --modification-date=,
--gpt_disk_guid,  and  --set_all_file_dates.  Startup files and program
options can override the effect of SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH.
Packages reviewed and fixed, and bugs filed The following packages have become reproducible after being fixed: The following updated packages appear to be reproducible now, for reasons we were not able to figure out. (Relevant changelogs did not mention reproducible builds.) The following 2 packages were not changed, but have become reproducible due to changes in their build-dependencies: tagsoup tclx8.4. Some uploads have addressed some reproducibility issues, but not all of them: Patches submitted that have not made their way to the archive yet: Bug tracker house keeping: Reviews of unreproducible packages 55 package reviews have been added, 161 have been updated and 136 have been removed in this week, adding to our knowledge about identified issues. 2 issue types have been updated: Weekly QA work FTBFS bugs have been reported by: diffoscope development Chris Lamb, Holger Levsen and Mattia Rizzolo worked on diffoscope this week. Improvements were made to SquashFS and JSON comparison, the https://try.diffoscope.org/ web service, documentation, packaging, and general code quality. diffoscope 57, 58, and 59 were uploaded to unstable by Chris Lamb. Versions 57 and 58 were both broken, so Holger set up a job on jenkins.debian.net to test diffoscope on each git commit. He also wrote a CONTRIBUTING document to help prevent this from happening in future. From these efforts, we were also able to learn that diffoscope is now reproducible even when built across multiple architectures: 
< h01ger>   https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/diffoscope.html shows these packages were built on amd64:
< h01ger>    bd21db708fe91c01ba1c9cb35b9d41a7c9b0db2b 62288 diffoscope_59_all.deb
< h01ger>    366200bf2841136a4c8f8c30bdc87057d59a4cdd 20146 trydiffoscope_59_all.deb
< h01ger>   and on i386:
< h01ger>    bd21db708fe91c01ba1c9cb35b9d41a7c9b0db2b 62288 diffoscope_59_all.deb
< h01ger>    366200bf2841136a4c8f8c30bdc87057d59a4cdd 20146 trydiffoscope_59_all.deb
< h01ger>   and on armhf:
< h01ger>    bd21db708fe91c01ba1c9cb35b9d41a7c9b0db2b 62288 diffoscope_59_all.deb
< h01ger>    366200bf2841136a4c8f8c30bdc87057d59a4cdd 20146 trydiffoscope_59_all.deb
And those also match the binaries uploaded by Chris in his diffoscope 59 binary upload to ftp.debian.org, yay! Eating our own dogfood and enjoying it! tests.reproducible-builds.org Debian related: The last change probably will have an impact you will see: your package might become unreproducible in unstable and this will be shown on tracker.debian.org, while it will still be reproducible in testing. We've done this, because we think reproducible builds are possible with arbitrary build paths. But: we don't think those are a realistic goal for stretch, where we still recommend to use .buildinfo to record the build patch and then do rebuilds using that path. We are doing this, because besides doing theoretical groundwork we also have a practical goal: enable users to independently verify builds. And if they only can do this with a fixed path, so be it. For now :) To be clear: for Stretch we recommend that reproducible builds are done in the same build path as the "original" build. Finally, and just for our future references, when we enabled build path variation on Saturday, August 20th 2016, the numbers for unstable were:
suite all reproducible unreproducible ftbfs depwait not for this arch blacklisted
unstable/amd64 24693 21794 (88.2%) 1753 (7.1%) 972 (3.9%) 65 (0.2%) 95 (0.3%) 10 (0.0%)
unstable/i386 24693 21182 (85.7%) 2349 (9.5%) 972 (3.9%) 76 (0.3%) 103 (0.4%) 10 (0.0%)
unstable/armhf 24693 20889 (84.6%) 2050 (8.3%) 1126 (4.5%) 199 (0.8%) 296 (1.1%) 129 (0.5%)
Misc. Ximin Luo updated our git setup scripts to make it easier for people to write proper descriptions for our repositories. This week's edition was written by Ximin Luo and Holger Levsen and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible Builds folks on IRC.

21 July 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible builds: week 62 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between June 26th and July 2nd 2016: Read on to find out why we're lagging some weeks behind ! GSoC and Outreachy updates Toolchain fixes With the doxygen upload we are now down to only 2 modified packages in our repository: dpkg and rdfind. Weekly reports delay and the future of statistics To catch up with our backlog of weekly reports we have decided to skip some of the statistics for this week. We might publish them in a future report, or we might switch to a format where we summarize them more (and which we can create (even) more automatically), we'll see. We are doing these weekly statistics because we believe it's appropriate and useful to credit people's work and make it more visible. What do you think? We would love to hear your thoughts on this matter! Do you read these statistics? Somewhat? Actually, thanks to the power of notmuch, Holger came up with what you can see below, so what's missing for this week are the uploads fixing irreprodubilities. Which we really would like to show for the reasons stated above and because we really really need these uploads to happen ;-) But then we also like to confirm the bugs are really gone, which (atm) requires manual checking, and to look for the words "reproducible" and "deterministic" (and spelling variations) in debian/changelogs of all uploads, to spot reproducible work not tracked via the BTS. And we still need to catch up on the backlog of weekly reports. Bugs submitted with reproducible usertags It seems DebCamp in Cape Town was hugely successful and made some people get a lot of work done: 61 bugs have been filed with reproducible builds usertags and 60 of them had patches: Package reviews 437 new reviews have been added (though most of them were just linking the bug, "only" 56 new issues in packages were found), an unknown number has been been updated and 60 have been removed in this week, adding to our knowledge about identified issues. 4 new issue types have been found: Weekly QA work 98 FTBFS bugs have been reported by Chris Lamb and Santiago Vila. diffoscope development strip-nondeterminism development tests.reproducible-builds.org Misc. This week's edition was written by Mattia Rizzolo, Reiner Herrmann, Ceridwen and Holger Levsen and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible builds folks on IRC.

3 July 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible builds: week 61 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between June 19th and June 25th 2016. Media coverage GSoC and Outreachy updates Toolchain fixes Other upstream fixes Emil Velikov searched on IRC for hints on how to guarantee unique values during build to invalidate shader caches in Mesa, when also no VCS information is available. A possible solution is a timestamp, which is unique enough for local builds, but can still be reproducible by allowing it to be overwritten with SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH. Packages fixed The following 9 packages have become reproducible due to changes in their build dependencies: cclib librun-parts-perl llvm-toolchain-snapshot python-crypto python-openid r-bioc-shortread r-bioc-variantannotation ruby-hdfeos5 sqlparse The following packages have become reproducible after being fixed: Some uploads have fixed some reproducibility issues, but not all of them: Patches submitted that have not made their way to the archive yet: Package reviews 139 reviews have been added, 20 have been updated and 21 have been removed in this week. New issues found: 53 FTBFS bugs have been reported by Chris Lamb, Santiago Vila and Mateusz ukasik. diffoscope development Quote of the week "My builds are so reproducible, they fail exactly every second time." Johannes Ziemke (@discordianfish) Misc. This week's edition was written by Chris Lamb (lamby), Reiner Herrmann and Holger Levsen and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible builds folks on IRC.

21 June 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible builds: week 60 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between June 12th and June 18th 2016: Media coverage GSoC and Outreachy updates Weekly reports by our participants: Toolchain fixes With this upload of texlive-bin we decided to stop keeping our patched fork of as most of the patches for SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH support had been integrated upstream already, and the last one (making FORCE_SOURCE_DATE default to 1) had been refused. So, we are now going to let the archive be rebuilt against unstable's texlive-bin and see how many packages will become unreproducible with this change; once enough data will be collected we will ponder whether FORCE_SOURCE_DATE should be exported by helper tools (such as debhelper) or manually exported by every package that needs it. (For those wondering: we still recommend to follow SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH always and don't recommend other projects to implement FORCE_SOURCE_DATE ) With the drop of texlive-bin we now have only three modified packages in our experimental repository. Reproducible work in other projects Packages fixed The following 12 packages have become reproducible due to changes in their build dependencies: django-floppyforms flask-restful hy jets3t kombu llvm-toolchain-3.8 moap python-bottle python-debtcollector python-django-debug-toolbar python-osprofiler stevedore The following packages have become reproducible after being fixed: Some uploads have fixed some reproducibility issues, but not all of them: Uploads with reproducibility fixes that currently fail to build: Patches submitted that have not made their way to the archive yet: Package reviews 36 reviews have been added, 12 have been updated and 31 have been removed in this week. 17 FTBFS bugs have been reported by Chris Lamb, Santiago Vila and Dominic Hargreaves. diffoscope development Satyam worked on argument completion (#826711) for diffoscope. strip-nondeterminism development Mattia Rizzolo uploaded strip-nondeterminism 0.019-1~bpo8+1 to jessie-backports. reprotest development Ceridwen filed an Intent To Package (ITP) bug for reprotest as #827293. tests.reproducible-builds.org Misc. This week's edition was written by Mattia Rizzolo, Reiner Herrmann, Ed Maste and Holger Levsen and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible builds folks on IRC.

15 June 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible builds: week 59 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between June 5th and June 11th 2016: Media coverage Ed Maste gave a talk at BSDCan 2016 on reproducible builds (slides, video). GSoC and Outreachy updates Weekly reports by our participants: Documentation update - Ximin Luo proposed a modification to our SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH spec explaining FORCE_SOURCE_DATE. Some upstream build tools (e.g. TeX, see below) have expressed a desire to control which cases of embedded timestamps should obey SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH. They were not convinced by our arguments on why this is a bad idea, so we agreed on an environment variable FORCE_SOURCE_DATE for them to implement their desired behaviour - named generically, so that at least we can set it centrally. For more details, see the text just linked. However, we strongly urge most build tools not to use this, and instead obey SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH unconditionally in all cases. Toolchain fixes Packages fixed The following 16 packages have become reproducible due to changes in their build-dependencies: apertium-dan-nor apertium-swe-nor asterisk-prompt-fr-armelle blktrace canl-c code-saturne coinor-symphony dsc-statistics frobby libphp-jpgraph paje.app proxycheck pybit spip tircd xbs The following 5 packages are new in Debian and appear to be reproducible so far: golang-github-bowery-prompt golang-github-pkg-errors golang-gopkg-dancannon-gorethink.v2 libtask-kensho-perl sspace The following packages had older versions which were reproducible, and their latest versions are now reproducible again after being fixed: The following packages have become reproducible after being fixed: Some uploads have fixed some reproducibility issues, but not all of them: Patches submitted that have not made their way to the archive yet: Package reviews 68 reviews have been added, 19 have been updated and 28 have been removed in this week. New and updated issues: 26 FTBFS bugs have been reported by Chris Lamb, 1 by Santiago Vila and 1 by Sascha Steinbiss. diffoscope development strip-nondeterminism development disorderfs development tests.reproducible-builds.org Misc. Steven Chamberlain submitted a patch to FreeBSD's makefs to allow reproducible builds of the kfreebsd installer. Ed Maste committed a patch to FreeBSD's binutils to enable determinstic archives by default in GNU ar. Helmut Grohne experimented with cross+native reproductions of dash with some success, using rebootstrap. This week's edition was written by Ximin Luo, Chris Lamb, Holger Levsen, Mattia Rizzolo and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible builds folks on IRC.

30 May 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible builds: week 57 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between May 22nd and May 28th 2016: Media coverage Documentation update Toolchain fixes Packages fixed The following 18 packages have become reproducible due to changes in their build dependencies: canl-c configshell dbus-java dune-common frobby frown installation-guide jexcelapi libjsyntaxpane-java malaga octave-ocs paje.app pd-boids pfstools r-cran-rniftilib scscp-imcce snort vim-addon-manager The following packages have become reproducible after being fixed: Some uploads have fixed some reproducibility issues, but not all of them: Patches submitted that have not made their way to the archive yet: Package reviews 123 reviews have been added, 57 have been updated and 135 have been removed in this week. 21 FTBFS bugs have been reported by Chris Lamb and Santiago Vila. strip-nondeterminism development tests.reproducible-builds.org Misc. This week's edition was written by Reiner Herrmann and Holger Levsen and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible builds folks on IRC.

22 May 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible builds: week 56 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between May 15th and May 21st 2016: Media coverage Blog posts from our GSoC and Outreachy contributors: Documentation update Ximin Luo clarified instructions on how to set SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH. Toolchain fixes Other upstream fixes Packages fixed The following 18 packages have become reproducible due to changes in their build dependencies: abiword angband apt-listbugs asn1c bacula-doc bittornado cdbackup fenix gap-autpgrp gerbv jboss-logging-tools invokebinder modplugtools objenesis pmw r-cran-rniftilib x-loader zsnes The following packages have become reproducible after being fixed: Some uploads have fixed some reproducibility issues, but not all of them: Patches submitted that have not made their way to the archive yet: Reproducibility-related bugs filed: Package reviews 51 reviews have been added, 19 have been updated and 15 have been removed in this week. 22 FTBFS bugs have been reported by Chris Lamb, Santiago Vila, Niko Tyni and Daniel Schepler. tests.reproducible-builds.org Misc. This week's edition was written by Reiner Herrmann and Holger Levsen and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible builds folks on IRC.

2 May 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible builds: week 53 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the Reproducible Builds effort between April 24th and 30th 2016. Media coverage Reproducible builds were mentioned explicitly in two talks at the Mini-DebConf in Vienna: Aspiration together with the OTF CommunityLab released their report about the Reproducible Builds summit in December 2015 in Athens. Toolchain fixes Now that the GCC development window has been opened again, the SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH patch by Dhole and Matthias Klose to address the issue timestamps_from_cpp_macros (__DATE__ / __TIME__) has been applied upstream and will be released with GCC 7. Following that Matthias Klose also has uploaded gcc-5/5.3.1-17 and gcc-6/6.1.1-1 to unstable with a backport of that SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH patch. Emmanuel Bourg uploaded maven/3.3.9-4, which uses SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH for the maven.build.timestamp. (SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH specification) Other upstream changes Alexis Bienven e submitted a patch to Sphinx which extends SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH support for copyright years in generated documentation. Packages fixed The following 12 packages have become reproducible due to changes in their build dependencies: hhvm jcsp libfann libflexdock-java libjcommon-java libswingx1-java mobile-atlas-creator not-yet-commons-ssl plexus-utils squareness svnclientadapter The following packages have became reproducible after being fixed: Some uploads have fixed some reproducibility issues, but not all of them: Patches submitted that have not made their way to the archive yet: Package reviews 95 reviews have been added, 15 have been updated and 129 have been removed in this week. 22 FTBFS bugs have been reported by Chris Lamb and Martin Michlmayr. diffoscope development strip-nondeterminism development tests.reproducible-builds.org Misc. Amongst the 29 interns who will work on Debian through GSoC and Outreachy there are four who will be contributing to Reproducible Builds for Debian and Free Software. We are very glad to welcome ceridwen, Satyam Zode, Scarlett Clark and Valerie Young and look forward to working together with them the coming months (and maybe beyond)! This week's edition was written by Reiner Herrmann and Holger Levsen and reviewed by a bunch of Reproducible builds folks on IRC.

20 April 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible builds: week 51 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the reproducible builds effort between April 10th and April 16th 2016: Toolchain fixes Antoine Beaupr suggested that gitpkg stops recording timestamps when creating upstream archives. Antoine Beaupr also pointed out that git-buildpackage diverges from the default gzip settings which is a problem for reproducibly recreating released tarballs which were made using the defaults. Alexis Bienven e submitted a patch extending sphinx SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH support to copyright year. Packages fixed The following packages have become reproducible due to changes in their build dependencies: atinject-jsr330, avis, brailleutils, charactermanaj, classycle, commons-io, commons-javaflow, commons-jci, gap-radiroot, jebl2, jetty, libcommons-el-java, libcommons-jxpath-java, libjackson-json-java, libjogl2-java, libmicroba-java, libproxool-java, libregexp-java, mobile-atlas-creator, octave-econometrics, octave-linear-algebra, octave-odepkg, octave-optiminterp, rapidsvn, remotetea, ruby-rinku, tachyon, xhtmlrenderer. The following packages became reproducible after getting fixed: Some uploads fixed some reproducibility issues, but not all of them: Patches submitted which have not made their way to the archive yet: diffoscope development Zbigniew J drzejewski-Szmek noted in #820631 that diffoscope doesn't work properly when a file contains several cpio archives. Package reviews 21 reviews have been added, 14 updated and 22 removed in this week. New issue found: timestamps_in_htm_by_gap. Chris Lamb reported 10 new FTBFS issues. Misc. The video and the slides from the talk "Reproducible builds ecosystem" at LibrePlanet 2016 have been published now. This week's edition was written by Lunar and Holger Levsen. h01ger automated the maintenance and publishing of this weekly newsletter via git.

12 April 2016

Reproducible builds folks: Reproducible builds: week 48 in Stretch cycle

What happened in the reproducible builds effort between March 20th and March 26th: Toolchain fixes Daniel Kahn Gillmor worked on removing build path from build symbols submitting a patch adding -fdebug-prefix-map to clang to match GCC, another patch against gcc-5 to backport the removal of -fdebug-prefix-map from DW_AT_producer, and finally by proposing the addition of a normalizedebugpath to the reproducible feature set of dpkg-buildflags that would use -fdebug-prefix-map to replace the current directory with . using -fdebug-prefix-map. Sergey Poznyakoff merged the --clamp-mtime option so that it will be featured in the next Tar release. This option is likely to be used by dpkg-deb to implement deterministic mtimes for packaged files. Packages fixed The following packages have become reproducible due to changes in their build dependencies: augeas, gmtkbabel, ktikz, octave-control, octave-general, octave-image, octave-ltfat, octave-miscellaneous, octave-mpi, octave-nurbs, octave-octcdf, octave-sockets, octave-strings, openlayers, python-structlog, signond. The following packages became reproducible after getting fixed: Some uploads fixed some reproducibility issues, but not all of them: Patches submitted which have not made their way to the archive yet: tests.reproducible-builds.org i386 build nodes have been setup by converting 2 of the 4 amd64 nodes to i386. (h01ger) Package reviews 92 reviews have been removed, 66 added and 31 updated in the previous week. New issues: timestamps_generated_by_xbean_spring, timestamps_generated_by_mangosdk_spiprocessor. Chris Lamb filed 7 FTBFS bugs. Misc. On March 20th, Chris Lamb gave a talk at FOSSASIA 2016 in Singapore. The very same day, but a few timezones apart, h01ger did a presentation at LibrePlanet 2016 in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Seven GSoC/Outreachy applications were made by potential interns to work on various aspects of the reproducible builds effort. On top of interacting with several applicants, prospective mentors gathered to review the applications.

Next.