On 2024-03-30, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > On 2024-03-30, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 07:38:35PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: >>> Philipp Kern asked about trying to do reproducible builds checks for >>> recent security updates to try to gain confidence about Debian's buildd >>> infrastructure, given that they run builds in sid chroots which may have >>> used or built or run a vulnerable xz-utils... > ... >> There would be an upcoming (or actually postponed) util-linux update >> as well. Could you as extra paranoia please verify these here as well >> (I assume its enough for you that the source package is signed, I >> stripped the signature from the changes): >> >> https://people.debian.org/~carnil/tmp/util-linux/ > > I don't see any source packages there, just .deb .changes and signed > .buildinfo files! The signed .buildinfo files are great, but would > definitely need the source code ... looks like the util-linux changes > are in a git branch, but a signed .dsc would be nice just to be sure I > am testing the same thing. That said, testing from git and getting > bit-for-bit identical results ... would be confidence inspiring! > Hmmm. Might just go for it, and if we have issues, maybe try to dig up > the .dsc? :)
Hah. Almost in the time it took me to wonder about git vs. .dsc builds, even with some minor differences in the build-depends, managed a bit-for-bit identical build of util-linux:amd64 and util-linux:all! Tarball of build logs and .buildinfo files: https://people.debian.org/~vagrant/util-linux-2.38.1-5+deb12u1.verification.tar.zst live well, vagrant
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
