Re: (java) Builds not reproducible on armhf
Mechtilde Stehmann <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.debian.devel.java,gmane.linux.debian.ports.arm |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hello, in the meantime I did some more tests to find the reason for it. I build it again with pbuilder specifying ARCH=armhf and get the right date for the pom file (same date as the amd64 build) Now I think I need access to an armhf box to test it natively. What should I do to get temporary. Kind regards Mechtilde Am 21.05.24 um 19:20 schrieb Vagrant Cascadian: > On 2024-05-20, Mechtilde Stehmann wrote: >> I want to clean up my Java packages. >> >> There are several with FTBR. I found that the day of the *.poms s a date >> from 1970. >> >> for example they are the packages >> >> vinnie > > Looking at the history for vinnie: > > https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/history/armhf/vinnie.html > > It is only very recently that this started happening (2024-05-04) > without source changes in vinnie itself, so I would suspect some change > in the toolchain used to produce the .pom files? > > commons-email is similar, although starting 2024-04-04: > > https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/history/armhf/commons-email.html > > ez-vcard is similar too, starting 2024-04-20: > > https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/trixie/armhf/diffoscope-results/ez-vcard.html > > Although some of those builds also have differences in some xz > contents... might just be related to the timestamp differences. > > > Wild hunch is one build is run on a 64-bit kernel (without a linux32 > personality) and one build on a 32-bit kernel... that is one of the main > differences between these armhf test builds and builds on other > architectures, where this does not seem to happen... > > > live well, > vagrant -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F