Reproducible Builds: Reproducible Builds in April 2026
Welcome to our April 2026 report from the Reproducible Builds project!
Our reports outline what we ve been up to over the past month, highlighting items of news from elsewhere in the increasingly-important area of software supply-chain security. As ever, if you are interested in contributing to the Reproducible Builds project, please see the Contribute page on our website.
In this month s report, we cover:
- Tor stateless relays and Reproducible Builds
- Civil Infrastructure Platform celebrates 10 years of supporting industrial grade Linux
- Reproducible Builds at LinuxFest NorthWest
- Reproducibility issues in Rust binaries that embed random bytes
- Distribution work
- Patches
- diffoscope development
- Documentation updates
- Misc news
Tor stateless relays and Reproducible Builds
An interesting post was published on Tor Project blog by Osservatorio Nessuno OdV this month on stateless relays . These are stateless, diskless operating systems that are designed to be used as Tor exit relays. According to the post, which is titled A Server That Forgets: Exploring Stateless Relays:
For relay operators, this approach raises the security bar by enforcing better behaviors by design:
[ ]
- Reproducibility. A system that doesn t change between reboots is easier to verify and, eventually, to reproduce and audit.
Furthermore, using a Trusted Platform Module (TPM), could allow for greater integrity in the future:
Transparency logs. Once you have a measured boot chain, you can publish it. A relay operator provides a recipe for a reproducible build; anyone can recompute the expected hash and verify it matches what the TPM reports. An append-only transparency log can make these attestations publicly auditable. The Tor community could run an independent monitor to track this across the relay fleet.
Civil Infrastructure Platform celebrates 10 years of supporting industrial grade Linux
Congratulations to the Civil Infrastructure Platform (CIP) for reaching their 10-year anniversary last month. CIP has been a supporter of Reproducible Builds for many years, and we have collaborated on a number of technical issues that overlap. As Chris Lamb mentions in CIP s press release:
The collaboration between the Reproducible Builds project and CIP highlights a critical shift in how we approach industrial software. Through verifiability, CIP ensures that the open source foundation of our critical infrastructure is not only sustainable but also demonstrably secure. This commitment to transparency is vital for the trust and resilience required by critical systems over decades of operation.
Reproducible Builds at LinuxFest NorthWest
Vagrant Cascadian and Chris Lamb hosted a table in the exposition hall at LinuxFest NorthWest 2026 this month in Bellingham, WA, USA, introducing many people to Reproducible Builds and answering questions both days of the conference.
In addition, Vagrant presented Beyond Trusting Open Source Software on Sunday afternoon, exploring the intersection of Free/Open Source Software, Reproducible Builds and Bootstrappable builds, and how they all reinforce each other. Vagrant s slides are available online, including source code to build them reproducibly.
Reproducibility issues in Rust binaries that embed random bytes
Reproducible Builds developer kpcyrd opened a ticket on the Rustsec issue tracker regarding binaries that deliberately inject random bytes into their binaries as a secret seed for a Hash Collision DoS mitigation.
As kpcyrd notes in his message, this causes issues for reproducibility, and because the relevant end-user binaries are mostly distributed pre-compiled through package managers, those binaries (and by extension the secret seed) are public knowledge . kpcyrd goes on to note:
This is somewhat unique to Rust because Python/JavaScript doesn t compile binaries, and Go (to my knowledge) is too restrictive during build for any library to pull something like this.
Distribution work
In Arch Linux this month, Robin Candau and Mark Hegreberg worked at adding a new repro tag/version to the Arch Linux Docker images providing a bit-for-bit reproducible image. Robin also shared a related announcement and implementation details on our mailing list.
Arch Linux developer Robin Candau posted a blog post announcing that Arch Linux Now Has a Bit-for-Bit Reproducible Docker Image . Robin mentions one interesting caveat:
to ensure reproducibility, the pacman [package manager] keys have to be stripped from the image, meaning that pacman is not usable out of the box in this image. While waiting to find a suitable solution to this technical constraint, we are therefore providing this reproducible image under a dedicated tag as a first milestone. [ ]
The blog post was also discussed on Hacker News.
In Debian this month, 24 reviews of Debian packages were added, 7 were updated and 16 were removed this month adding to our knowledge about identified issues.
Vagrant Cascadian performed Non-Maintainer Uploads (NMUs) in Debian for several packages with outstanding patches over a year old jakarta-jmeter, wxmplot, critcl, vcsh and magic-wormhole-transit-relay.
In addition, Reproducible Builds developer Jochen Sprickerhof filed a bug against the APT package manager to request that APT should ignore [a] 0 epoch when downloading or installing with a version specifier . This is related to the special-case handling of the optional epoch prefix in Debian package version numbers.
In NixOS, Julien Malka presented Lila: Decentralized Build Reproducibility Monitoring for the Functional Package Management Model, a paper written together with Arnout Engelen at the Mining Software Repositories (MSR) ACM conference, where it was awarded the MSR 2026 FOSS Impact Award. Congratulations!
Lastly, in openSUSE, Michael Schroeder added reproducibility verification support in the Open Build Service [ ] and Bernhard M. Wiedemann posted another openSUSE monthly update for their reproducibility work there.
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 applicable or possible. This month, we wrote a large number of such patches, including:
-
Bernhard M. Wiedemann:
-
Chris Lamb:
- #1132876 filed against
wapiti.
- #1133008 filed against
mage.
- #1133174 filed against
vim-youcompleteme.
- #1133958 filed against
python-observabilityclient.
- #1133960 filed against
gwcs.
- #1134236 filed against
php-dompdf.
- #1134490 filed against
supercell.
- #1134552 filed against
gunicorn.
- #1134666 filed against
fonts-spleen.
- #1134667 filed against
geoalchemy2.
- #1134668 filed against
rust-opam-file-rs.
- #1135003 filed against
spaln.
- #1135104 filed against
python-msgspec.
- #1135192 filed against
golang-github-go-ini-ini.
- #1135193 filed against
golang-github-deruina-timberjack.
- #1135269 filed against
ruby-timers.
- #1135279 filed against
node-yarnpkg.
-
Jochen Sprickerhof:
-
Michael Schroeder:
-
Robin Candau:
-
Chris Lamb and Vagrant Cascadian:
-
Manuel Jacob
binutils (consider SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH when emitting static library archive header)
diffoscope development
diffoscope is our in-depth and content-aware diff utility that can locate and diagnose reproducibility issues. This month, Chris Lamb made a number of changes, including preparing and uploading versions, 316, 317 and 318 to Debian.
-
Chris Lamb:
-
Holger Levsen:
In addition, Vagrant Cascadian updated diffoscope in GNU Guix to version 317.
Documentation updates
Yet again, there were a number of improvements made to our website this month including:
-
Manuel Jacob:
- Fix some minor wording issues on the Stable inputs page, and update information about the sorting behavior of GNU Make [ ].
- On the Archives page, remove information about deterministic archives in historical Fedora versions [ ], add a note about
.tar file portability [ ] and correct a section about .tar PAX headers [ ].
-
Mattia Rizzolo:
- Add a basic draft, subject to change, of the 2026 Gothenberg Summit event page. [ ][ ]
-
kpcyrd:
- Remove a link from the 2026 Gothenberg Summit event page. [ ]
-
ktecho:
- Add WalletScrutiny.com to the Projects page. [ ]
Misc news
On our mailing list this month:
-
Timo Pohl posted our list inviting people to online group discussions with 4-6 participants each to talk about your perception of terms and
requirements for reproducibility. As Timo notes:
During our research of the existing literature, as well as my experience
at the Reproducible Builds Summit 2025 in Vienna,
we noticed that some of the terminology in the field is not used
consistently across different groups of people, and that the precise
meaning of some core terms like reproducibility of an artifact in
itself is not uniform.
As Timo mentions, the sessions will last roughly 90 minutes and will be rewarded with 50 per participant.
-
kpcyrd posted to the list asking for assistance with fixing an issue after updating the
flake.lock file for their repro-env project.
-
Aman Sharma of the KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden, posted to our list in order to share that Eric Cornelissen, a PhD student in KTH s CHAINS group, is maintaining an open-source project to monitor the reproducibility of GitHub Actions:
The goal of the project is to assess whether
GitHub Actions can be reproduced.
Currently, it focuses on two types of Actions: JavaScript-based actions
and Docker-based actions (composite actions are
not considered). For JavaScript actions, the project rebuilds the
distributed files and compares them bit-by-bit with the repository
contents. For Docker actions, it rebuilds
images from the Dockerfile and checks for semantic equivalence, using
diffoci, across
builds.
Finally, 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:
-
IRC:
#reproducible-builds on irc.oftc.net.
-
Mastodon: @reproducible_builds@fosstodon.org
-
Mailing list:
rb-general@lists.reproducible-builds.org
- Reproducibility. A system that doesn t change between reboots is easier to verify and, eventually, to reproduce and audit.
Congratulations to the Civil Infrastructure Platform (CIP) for reaching their 10-year anniversary last month. CIP has been a supporter of Reproducible Builds for many years, and we have collaborated on a number of technical issues that overlap. As Chris Lamb mentions in CIP s press release:
The collaboration between the Reproducible Builds project and CIP highlights a critical shift in how we approach industrial software. Through verifiability, CIP ensures that the open source foundation of our critical infrastructure is not only sustainable but also demonstrably secure. This commitment to transparency is vital for the trust and resilience required by critical systems over decades of operation.
Reproducible Builds at LinuxFest NorthWest
Vagrant Cascadian and Chris Lamb hosted a table in the exposition hall at LinuxFest NorthWest 2026 this month in Bellingham, WA, USA, introducing many people to Reproducible Builds and answering questions both days of the conference.
In addition, Vagrant presented Beyond Trusting Open Source Software on Sunday afternoon, exploring the intersection of Free/Open Source Software, Reproducible Builds and Bootstrappable builds, and how they all reinforce each other. Vagrant s slides are available online, including source code to build them reproducibly.
Reproducibility issues in Rust binaries that embed random bytes
Reproducible Builds developer kpcyrd opened a ticket on the Rustsec issue tracker regarding binaries that deliberately inject random bytes into their binaries as a secret seed for a Hash Collision DoS mitigation.
As kpcyrd notes in his message, this causes issues for reproducibility, and because the relevant end-user binaries are mostly distributed pre-compiled through package managers, those binaries (and by extension the secret seed) are public knowledge . kpcyrd goes on to note:
This is somewhat unique to Rust because Python/JavaScript doesn t compile binaries, and Go (to my knowledge) is too restrictive during build for any library to pull something like this.
Distribution work
In Arch Linux this month, Robin Candau and Mark Hegreberg worked at adding a new repro tag/version to the Arch Linux Docker images providing a bit-for-bit reproducible image. Robin also shared a related announcement and implementation details on our mailing list.
Arch Linux developer Robin Candau posted a blog post announcing that Arch Linux Now Has a Bit-for-Bit Reproducible Docker Image . Robin mentions one interesting caveat:
to ensure reproducibility, the pacman [package manager] keys have to be stripped from the image, meaning that pacman is not usable out of the box in this image. While waiting to find a suitable solution to this technical constraint, we are therefore providing this reproducible image under a dedicated tag as a first milestone. [ ]
The blog post was also discussed on Hacker News.
In Debian this month, 24 reviews of Debian packages were added, 7 were updated and 16 were removed this month adding to our knowledge about identified issues.
Vagrant Cascadian performed Non-Maintainer Uploads (NMUs) in Debian for several packages with outstanding patches over a year old jakarta-jmeter, wxmplot, critcl, vcsh and magic-wormhole-transit-relay.
In addition, Reproducible Builds developer Jochen Sprickerhof filed a bug against the APT package manager to request that APT should ignore [a] 0 epoch when downloading or installing with a version specifier . This is related to the special-case handling of the optional epoch prefix in Debian package version numbers.
In NixOS, Julien Malka presented Lila: Decentralized Build Reproducibility Monitoring for the Functional Package Management Model, a paper written together with Arnout Engelen at the Mining Software Repositories (MSR) ACM conference, where it was awarded the MSR 2026 FOSS Impact Award. Congratulations!
Lastly, in openSUSE, Michael Schroeder added reproducibility verification support in the Open Build Service [ ] and Bernhard M. Wiedemann posted another openSUSE monthly update for their reproducibility work there.
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 applicable or possible. This month, we wrote a large number of such patches, including:
-
Bernhard M. Wiedemann:
-
Chris Lamb:
- #1132876 filed against
wapiti.
- #1133008 filed against
mage.
- #1133174 filed against
vim-youcompleteme.
- #1133958 filed against
python-observabilityclient.
- #1133960 filed against
gwcs.
- #1134236 filed against
php-dompdf.
- #1134490 filed against
supercell.
- #1134552 filed against
gunicorn.
- #1134666 filed against
fonts-spleen.
- #1134667 filed against
geoalchemy2.
- #1134668 filed against
rust-opam-file-rs.
- #1135003 filed against
spaln.
- #1135104 filed against
python-msgspec.
- #1135192 filed against
golang-github-go-ini-ini.
- #1135193 filed against
golang-github-deruina-timberjack.
- #1135269 filed against
ruby-timers.
- #1135279 filed against
node-yarnpkg.
-
Jochen Sprickerhof:
-
Michael Schroeder:
-
Robin Candau:
-
Chris Lamb and Vagrant Cascadian:
-
Manuel Jacob
binutils (consider SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH when emitting static library archive header)
diffoscope development
diffoscope is our in-depth and content-aware diff utility that can locate and diagnose reproducibility issues. This month, Chris Lamb made a number of changes, including preparing and uploading versions, 316, 317 and 318 to Debian.
-
Chris Lamb:
-
Holger Levsen:
In addition, Vagrant Cascadian updated diffoscope in GNU Guix to version 317.
Documentation updates
Yet again, there were a number of improvements made to our website this month including:
-
Manuel Jacob:
- Fix some minor wording issues on the Stable inputs page, and update information about the sorting behavior of GNU Make [ ].
- On the Archives page, remove information about deterministic archives in historical Fedora versions [ ], add a note about
.tar file portability [ ] and correct a section about .tar PAX headers [ ].
-
Mattia Rizzolo:
- Add a basic draft, subject to change, of the 2026 Gothenberg Summit event page. [ ][ ]
-
kpcyrd:
- Remove a link from the 2026 Gothenberg Summit event page. [ ]
-
ktecho:
- Add WalletScrutiny.com to the Projects page. [ ]
Misc news
On our mailing list this month:
-
Timo Pohl posted our list inviting people to online group discussions with 4-6 participants each to talk about your perception of terms and
requirements for reproducibility. As Timo notes:
During our research of the existing literature, as well as my experience
at the Reproducible Builds Summit 2025 in Vienna,
we noticed that some of the terminology in the field is not used
consistently across different groups of people, and that the precise
meaning of some core terms like reproducibility of an artifact in
itself is not uniform.
As Timo mentions, the sessions will last roughly 90 minutes and will be rewarded with 50 per participant.
-
kpcyrd posted to the list asking for assistance with fixing an issue after updating the
flake.lock file for their repro-env project.
-
Aman Sharma of the KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden, posted to our list in order to share that Eric Cornelissen, a PhD student in KTH s CHAINS group, is maintaining an open-source project to monitor the reproducibility of GitHub Actions:
The goal of the project is to assess whether
GitHub Actions can be reproduced.
Currently, it focuses on two types of Actions: JavaScript-based actions
and Docker-based actions (composite actions are
not considered). For JavaScript actions, the project rebuilds the
distributed files and compares them bit-by-bit with the repository
contents. For Docker actions, it rebuilds
images from the Dockerfile and checks for semantic equivalence, using
diffoci, across
builds.
Finally, 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:
-
IRC:
#reproducible-builds on irc.oftc.net.
-
Mastodon: @reproducible_builds@fosstodon.org
-
Mailing list:
rb-general@lists.reproducible-builds.org
Reproducible Builds developer kpcyrd opened a ticket on the Rustsec issue tracker regarding binaries that deliberately inject random bytes into their binaries as a secret seed for a Hash Collision DoS mitigation.
As kpcyrd notes in his message, this causes issues for reproducibility, and because the relevant end-user binaries are mostly distributed pre-compiled through package managers, those binaries (and by extension the secret seed) are public knowledge . kpcyrd goes on to note:
This is somewhat unique to Rust because Python/JavaScript doesn t compile binaries, and Go (to my knowledge) is too restrictive during build for any library to pull something like this.
Distribution work
In Arch Linux this month, Robin Candau and Mark Hegreberg worked at adding a new repro tag/version to the Arch Linux Docker images providing a bit-for-bit reproducible image. Robin also shared a related announcement and implementation details on our mailing list.
Arch Linux developer Robin Candau posted a blog post announcing that Arch Linux Now Has a Bit-for-Bit Reproducible Docker Image . Robin mentions one interesting caveat:
to ensure reproducibility, the pacman [package manager] keys have to be stripped from the image, meaning that pacman is not usable out of the box in this image. While waiting to find a suitable solution to this technical constraint, we are therefore providing this reproducible image under a dedicated tag as a first milestone. [ ]
The blog post was also discussed on Hacker News.
In Debian this month, 24 reviews of Debian packages were added, 7 were updated and 16 were removed this month adding to our knowledge about identified issues.
Vagrant Cascadian performed Non-Maintainer Uploads (NMUs) in Debian for several packages with outstanding patches over a year old jakarta-jmeter, wxmplot, critcl, vcsh and magic-wormhole-transit-relay.
In addition, Reproducible Builds developer Jochen Sprickerhof filed a bug against the APT package manager to request that APT should ignore [a] 0 epoch when downloading or installing with a version specifier . This is related to the special-case handling of the optional epoch prefix in Debian package version numbers.
In NixOS, Julien Malka presented Lila: Decentralized Build Reproducibility Monitoring for the Functional Package Management Model, a paper written together with Arnout Engelen at the Mining Software Repositories (MSR) ACM conference, where it was awarded the MSR 2026 FOSS Impact Award. Congratulations!
Lastly, in openSUSE, Michael Schroeder added reproducibility verification support in the Open Build Service [ ] and Bernhard M. Wiedemann posted another openSUSE monthly update for their reproducibility work there.
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 applicable or possible. This month, we wrote a large number of such patches, including:
-
Bernhard M. Wiedemann:
-
Chris Lamb:
- #1132876 filed against
wapiti.
- #1133008 filed against
mage.
- #1133174 filed against
vim-youcompleteme.
- #1133958 filed against
python-observabilityclient.
- #1133960 filed against
gwcs.
- #1134236 filed against
php-dompdf.
- #1134490 filed against
supercell.
- #1134552 filed against
gunicorn.
- #1134666 filed against
fonts-spleen.
- #1134667 filed against
geoalchemy2.
- #1134668 filed against
rust-opam-file-rs.
- #1135003 filed against
spaln.
- #1135104 filed against
python-msgspec.
- #1135192 filed against
golang-github-go-ini-ini.
- #1135193 filed against
golang-github-deruina-timberjack.
- #1135269 filed against
ruby-timers.
- #1135279 filed against
node-yarnpkg.
-
Jochen Sprickerhof:
-
Michael Schroeder:
-
Robin Candau:
-
Chris Lamb and Vagrant Cascadian:
-
Manuel Jacob
binutils (consider SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH when emitting static library archive header)
diffoscope development
diffoscope is our in-depth and content-aware diff utility that can locate and diagnose reproducibility issues. This month, Chris Lamb made a number of changes, including preparing and uploading versions, 316, 317 and 318 to Debian.
-
Chris Lamb:
-
Holger Levsen:
In addition, Vagrant Cascadian updated diffoscope in GNU Guix to version 317.
Documentation updates
Yet again, there were a number of improvements made to our website this month including:
-
Manuel Jacob:
- Fix some minor wording issues on the Stable inputs page, and update information about the sorting behavior of GNU Make [ ].
- On the Archives page, remove information about deterministic archives in historical Fedora versions [ ], add a note about
.tar file portability [ ] and correct a section about .tar PAX headers [ ].
-
Mattia Rizzolo:
- Add a basic draft, subject to change, of the 2026 Gothenberg Summit event page. [ ][ ]
-
kpcyrd:
- Remove a link from the 2026 Gothenberg Summit event page. [ ]
-
ktecho:
- Add WalletScrutiny.com to the Projects page. [ ]
Misc news
On our mailing list this month:
-
Timo Pohl posted our list inviting people to online group discussions with 4-6 participants each to talk about your perception of terms and
requirements for reproducibility. As Timo notes:
During our research of the existing literature, as well as my experience
at the Reproducible Builds Summit 2025 in Vienna,
we noticed that some of the terminology in the field is not used
consistently across different groups of people, and that the precise
meaning of some core terms like reproducibility of an artifact in
itself is not uniform.
As Timo mentions, the sessions will last roughly 90 minutes and will be rewarded with 50 per participant.
-
kpcyrd posted to the list asking for assistance with fixing an issue after updating the
flake.lock file for their repro-env project.
-
Aman Sharma of the KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden, posted to our list in order to share that Eric Cornelissen, a PhD student in KTH s CHAINS group, is maintaining an open-source project to monitor the reproducibility of GitHub Actions:
The goal of the project is to assess whether
GitHub Actions can be reproduced.
Currently, it focuses on two types of Actions: JavaScript-based actions
and Docker-based actions (composite actions are
not considered). For JavaScript actions, the project rebuilds the
distributed files and compares them bit-by-bit with the repository
contents. For Docker actions, it rebuilds
images from the Dockerfile and checks for semantic equivalence, using
diffoci, across
builds.
Finally, 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:
-
IRC:
#reproducible-builds on irc.oftc.net.
-
Mastodon: @reproducible_builds@fosstodon.org
-
Mailing list:
rb-general@lists.reproducible-builds.org
pacman [package manager] keys have to be stripped from the image, meaning that pacman is not usable out of the box in this image. While waiting to find a suitable solution to this technical constraint, we are therefore providing this reproducible image under a dedicated tag as a first milestone. [ ]
- Bernhard M. Wiedemann:
-
Chris Lamb:
- #1132876 filed against
wapiti. - #1133008 filed against
mage. - #1133174 filed against
vim-youcompleteme. - #1133958 filed against
python-observabilityclient. - #1133960 filed against
gwcs. - #1134236 filed against
php-dompdf. - #1134490 filed against
supercell. - #1134552 filed against
gunicorn. - #1134666 filed against
fonts-spleen. - #1134667 filed against
geoalchemy2. - #1134668 filed against
rust-opam-file-rs. - #1135003 filed against
spaln. - #1135104 filed against
python-msgspec. - #1135192 filed against
golang-github-go-ini-ini. - #1135193 filed against
golang-github-deruina-timberjack. - #1135269 filed against
ruby-timers. - #1135279 filed against
node-yarnpkg.
- #1132876 filed against
- Jochen Sprickerhof:
- Michael Schroeder:
- Robin Candau:
- Chris Lamb and Vagrant Cascadian:
-
Manuel Jacob
binutils(considerSOURCE_DATE_EPOCHwhen emitting static library archive header)
diffoscope development
diffoscope is our in-depth and content-aware diff utility that can locate and diagnose reproducibility issues. This month, Chris Lamb made a number of changes, including preparing and uploading versions, 316, 317 and 318 to Debian.
-
Chris Lamb:
-
Holger Levsen:
In addition, Vagrant Cascadian updated diffoscope in GNU Guix to version 317.
Documentation updates
Yet again, there were a number of improvements made to our website this month including:
-
Manuel Jacob:
- Fix some minor wording issues on the Stable inputs page, and update information about the sorting behavior of GNU Make [ ].
- On the Archives page, remove information about deterministic archives in historical Fedora versions [ ], add a note about
.tar file portability [ ] and correct a section about .tar PAX headers [ ].
-
Mattia Rizzolo:
- Add a basic draft, subject to change, of the 2026 Gothenberg Summit event page. [ ][ ]
-
kpcyrd:
- Remove a link from the 2026 Gothenberg Summit event page. [ ]
-
ktecho:
- Add WalletScrutiny.com to the Projects page. [ ]
Misc news
On our mailing list this month:
-
Timo Pohl posted our list inviting people to online group discussions with 4-6 participants each to talk about your perception of terms and
requirements for reproducibility. As Timo notes:
During our research of the existing literature, as well as my experience
at the Reproducible Builds Summit 2025 in Vienna,
we noticed that some of the terminology in the field is not used
consistently across different groups of people, and that the precise
meaning of some core terms like reproducibility of an artifact in
itself is not uniform.
As Timo mentions, the sessions will last roughly 90 minutes and will be rewarded with 50 per participant.
-
kpcyrd posted to the list asking for assistance with fixing an issue after updating the
flake.lock file for their repro-env project.
-
Aman Sharma of the KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden, posted to our list in order to share that Eric Cornelissen, a PhD student in KTH s CHAINS group, is maintaining an open-source project to monitor the reproducibility of GitHub Actions:
The goal of the project is to assess whether
GitHub Actions can be reproduced.
Currently, it focuses on two types of Actions: JavaScript-based actions
and Docker-based actions (composite actions are
not considered). For JavaScript actions, the project rebuilds the
distributed files and compares them bit-by-bit with the repository
contents. For Docker actions, it rebuilds
images from the Dockerfile and checks for semantic equivalence, using
diffoci, across
builds.
Finally, 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:
-
IRC:
#reproducible-builds on irc.oftc.net.
-
Mastodon: @reproducible_builds@fosstodon.org
-
Mailing list:
rb-general@lists.reproducible-builds.org
Yet again, there were a number of improvements made to our website this month including:
-
Manuel Jacob:
- Fix some minor wording issues on the Stable inputs page, and update information about the sorting behavior of GNU Make [ ].
- On the Archives page, remove information about deterministic archives in historical Fedora versions [ ], add a note about
.tarfile portability [ ] and correct a section about.tarPAX headers [ ].
-
Mattia Rizzolo:
- Add a basic draft, subject to change, of the 2026 Gothenberg Summit event page. [ ][ ]
-
kpcyrd:
- Remove a link from the 2026 Gothenberg Summit event page. [ ]
-
ktecho:
- Add WalletScrutiny.com to the Projects page. [ ]
Misc news
On our mailing list this month:
-
Timo Pohl posted our list inviting people to online group discussions with 4-6 participants each to talk about your perception of terms and
requirements for reproducibility. As Timo notes:
During our research of the existing literature, as well as my experience
at the Reproducible Builds Summit 2025 in Vienna,
we noticed that some of the terminology in the field is not used
consistently across different groups of people, and that the precise
meaning of some core terms like reproducibility of an artifact in
itself is not uniform.
As Timo mentions, the sessions will last roughly 90 minutes and will be rewarded with 50 per participant.
-
kpcyrd posted to the list asking for assistance with fixing an issue after updating the
flake.lock file for their repro-env project.
-
Aman Sharma of the KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden, posted to our list in order to share that Eric Cornelissen, a PhD student in KTH s CHAINS group, is maintaining an open-source project to monitor the reproducibility of GitHub Actions:
The goal of the project is to assess whether
GitHub Actions can be reproduced.
Currently, it focuses on two types of Actions: JavaScript-based actions
and Docker-based actions (composite actions are
not considered). For JavaScript actions, the project rebuilds the
distributed files and compares them bit-by-bit with the repository
contents. For Docker actions, it rebuilds
images from the Dockerfile and checks for semantic equivalence, using
diffoci, across
builds.
Finally, 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:
-
IRC:
#reproducible-builds on irc.oftc.net.
-
Mastodon: @reproducible_builds@fosstodon.org
-
Mailing list:
rb-general@lists.reproducible-builds.org
During our research of the existing literature, as well as my experience at the Reproducible Builds Summit 2025 in Vienna, we noticed that some of the terminology in the field is not used consistently across different groups of people, and that the precise meaning of some core terms like reproducibility of an artifact in itself is not uniform.As Timo mentions, the sessions will last roughly 90 minutes and will be rewarded with 50 per participant.
flake.lock file for their repro-env project.
The goal of the project is to assess whether GitHub Actions can be reproduced. Currently, it focuses on two types of Actions: JavaScript-based actions and Docker-based actions (composite actions are not considered). For JavaScript actions, the project rebuilds the distributed files and compares them bit-by-bit with the repository contents. For Docker actions, it rebuilds images from theDockerfileand checks for semantic equivalence, usingdiffoci, across builds.
#reproducible-builds on irc.oftc.net.
rb-general@lists.reproducible-builds.org
Drilling into an individual test gives you its full run history, a
duration sparkline, and per-run pass/fail status:
My Debian contributions this month were all
The AI hype is based on the assumption that the frontier AI labs are producing better and better foundational models at an accelerating pace. Is that really true, or are people just in sort of a mass psychosis because AI models have become so good at mimicking human behavior that we unconsciously attribute increasing intelligence to them? I decided to conduct a mini-benchmark of my own to find out if the latest and greatest AI models are actually really good or not.
Common for all the test questions is that they are fairly straightforward and have a clear answer, yet the answer isn t common knowledge or statistically the most obvious one, and instead requires a bit of reasoning to get correct.
Some of these questions are also based on myself witnessing a flagship model failing miserably to answer it.
While Gemini and Grok were among the three models not falling into this trap, the response from Claude was exemplary good:
I have seen Grok do something similar before, which in fact inspired me to include this question in my mini-benchmark.
GPT got a bit further, but for Hindi, Arabic and Bengali it listed the numerals in local script, not the number words. Gemini, GLM and Kimi gave a complete and correct answer as a list, while the absolute best answer and presentation was by Claude, that gave the table below:
A human can easily count that there are 10 rows and 30+ columns in the grid, but because the picture resolution isn t good enough, the exact number of columns can t be counted, and the answer should be that there are at least 300 launch pads in the picture.
GPT and Grok both guessed the count is zero. Instead of hallucinating some number they say zero, but it would have been better to not give any number at all, and just state that they are unable to perform the task. Gemini gave as its answer 101 , which is quite odd, but reading the reasoning section, it seems to have tried counting items in the image without reasoning much about what it is actually counting and that there is clearly a grid that can make the counting much easier. Both Qwen and Kimi state they can see four parallel structures, but are unable to count drone launch pads.
The absolutely best answer was given by Claude, which counted 10-12 rows and 30-40+ columns, and concluded that there must be 300-500 drone launch pads. Very close to best human level - impressive!
This question applied only to multi-modal models that can see images, so GLM and MinMax could not give any response.
The Debian LTS Team, funded by
2026 already! The winter weather here has really been beautiful and I always enjoy
this time of year. Writing this yearly musical retrospective has now become a
beloved tradition of mine
After cartridge pleating and honeycombing, I was still somewhat in the
mood for that kind of fabric manipulation, and directing my internet
searches in that vague direction, and I stumbled on this:
With the pieces being rectangles the width of the fabric, I was able to
have at least one side of selvedge on all seams, and took advantage of it
by finishing the seams by simply folding the allowances to one sides so
that the selvedge was on top, and hemstitching them down as I would have
done with a folded edge when felling.
Also, at first I wanted to make the smocking in white on white, but then
I thought about a few hanks of electric blue floss I had in my stash,
and decided to just go with it.
The initial seams were quickly made, then I started the smocking at the
neck, and at that time the project went on hold while I got ready to go
to DebConf. Then I came back and took some time to get back into a
sewing mood, but finally the smocking on the next was finished, and I
could go on with the main sewing, which, as I expected, went decently
fast for a handsewing project.
While doing the diagonal smocking on the collar I counted the stitches
to make each side the same length, which didn t completely work because
the gathers weren t that regular to start with, and started each line
from the two front opening going towards the center back, leaving a
triangle with a different size right in the middle. I think overall it
worked well enough.
Then there were a few more interruptions, but at last it was ready! just
as the weather turned cold-ish and puffy shirts were no longer in
season, but it will be there for me next spring.
I did manage to wear it a few times and I have to say that the neck
shaping is quite comfortable indeed: it doesn t pull in odd ways like
the classical historically accurate pirate shirt sometimes does, and the
heavy gathering at the neck makes it feel padded and soft.
I m not as happy with the cuffs: the way I did them with just
honeycombing means that they don t need a closure, and after washing and
a bit of steaming they lie nicely, but then they tend to relax in a
wider shape. The next time I think I ll leave a slit in the sleeves,
possibly make a different type of smocking (depending on whether I have
enough fabric) and then line them like the neck so that they are stable.
Because, yes, I think that there will be another time: I have a few more
project before that, and I want to spend maybe another year working from
my stash, but then I think I ll buy some soft linen and make at least
another one, maybe with white-on-white smocking so that it will be
easier to match with different garments.
We had 886 responses with status code 200 and 64 connections closed.
The backend terminated 64 connections while the load balancer still had
active requests directed to it.
Let's change the Load Balancer
Great! Now all the requests worked.
This is a common issue, not specific to Envoy Proxy or the setup
shown earlier. Major cloud providers have all documented it.
Even thought the success rate is 100%, the status code distribution
show some responses with status code 503. This is the case where is not
that obvious that the problem is related to idle timeout.
However, it's clear when we look the Envoy access logs:
Key Takeaways:
A shot of Jewel Changi. Photo by Ravi Dwivedi. Released under the CC-BY-SA 4.0.
A shot of Sentosa Boardwalk. Photo by Ravi Dwivedi. Released under the CC-BY-SA 4.0.
This is the hawker center we went to. Photo by Ravi Dwivedi. Released under the CC-BY-SA 4.0.
Table littering at the hawker center was prohibited by law. Photo by Ravi Dwivedi. Released under the CC-BY-SA 4.0.
Merlion from behind, giving a good view of Marina Bay Sands. Photo by Ravi Dwivedi. Released under the CC-BY-SA 4.0.
If you're still using Vagrant (I am) and try to boot a box that uses UEFI (like 


My trip to pgday.at started Wednesday at the airport in D sseldorf. I was there on time, and the plane started with an estimated flight time of about 90 minutes. About half an hour into the flight, the captain announced that we would be landing in 30 minutes - in D sseldorf, because of some unspecified technical problems. Three hours after the original departure time, the plane made another attempt, and we made it to Vienna.





