Re: Rant about Debian reproducibility environment
- Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2018 01:08:43 +0000
- From: Simon McVittie <smcv@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Rant about Debian reproducibility environment
On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 at 19:49:13 +0100, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> Simon McVittie <smcv@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> |Why is the kernel version on the machine where s-nail was compiled useful
> |to you?
> This is indeed correct, and i have changed $OSENV to go for
> uname(1) -sm instead of -srm.
Continuing that thought, why are the architecture and kernel of the
machine where s-nail was compiled interesting to you? If you cross-compile
s-nail on a Linux x86_64 machine, using a cross-compiler that produces
FreeBSD ARM binaries, I don't think "Linux x86_64" is a particularly
interesting fact about those binaries - particularly if you're debugging
something that only happens on the FreeBSD ARM machine!
Even if cross-compiling doesn't work for this particular package,
`uname -m` doesn't always return the same thing on compatible machines:
on at least 32-bit x86 and 32-bit ARM it can have several different
values (that are merely facts about the machine where it was compiled,
and aren't really anything to do with the machine on which it's running
and maybe demonstrating bugs that you want to solve).