On Wed, 2017-06-28 at 17:04 +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 08:57:33AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 14:56:56 +0100 > > <lbocc...@brocade.com> wrote: > > > > > From: Luca Boccassi <luca.bocca...@gmail.com> > > > > > > In the past couple of years a concerted effort among almost all > > > Linux > > > distros has been striving toward achieving reproducible builds. > > > [1] > > > This involves changes to the toolchain, new tools and CI systems. > > > [2] > > > > > > v1 fixed the documentation, examples and linker script > > > generation. > > > v2 fixes all problems, which were caused by unstable order of > > > headers > > > inclusion, source files listing and object file listing when > > > passing > > > them to the compiler. > > > DPDK's build, at least with the default configuration, is fully > > > reproducible with this patch series as tested by the Reproducible > > > Builds developers experimental toolchain. [3] > > > > > > v3 restores the first patch, which was eaten by git send-email. > > > > > > v4 drops the patch that reorders rebuilds, and adds a patch to > > > make > > > the inclusion of headers deterministic with regards to GCC > > > embedding > > > the full file path when expading __FILE__ and when writing the > > > directory listing in the DWARF objects. > > > It also drops the first 2 patches which have already been merged. > > > > > > [1] https://reproducible-builds.org/ > > > [2] https://reproducible-builds.org/tools/ > > > [3] https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/ExperimentalToolch > > > ain#Us > > > > Looks good. > > > > Looking ahead, how does this work with the proposed new build > > system? > > Is there an automated way to check new submissions so that new > > features > > don't undo this. > > > > > > Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <step...@networkplumber.org> > > http://mesonbuild.com/Reproducible-builds.html > > I'd hope if we switch build system, this shouldn't be a problem. It's > definitely something to watch out for. > > /Bruce
The one issue to look for, with the current build system, is the CFLAGS include path order (the last patch) in the makefiles under lib/ The pattern seems to be always the same, would it be possible & acceptable to add a check in checkpatch? bad: CFLAGS += -I$(SRCDIR) good: CFLAGS := -I$(SRCDIR) $(CFLAGS) -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
