On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 10:03:34 +0100 Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wur...@mdc-berlin.de> wrote:
> Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> writes: > > [...] > [...] > > This is correct. Back then we ran into trouble with our Guix > installation at work when someone modified permission bits on the > bootstrap binaries, causing a rebuild of everything. It took us a while > to find out the cause and revert the change. > > Some of the bootstrap binaries can be reproduced from source (if you > make sure to follow the Guix recipes), but others (like Guile IIRC) > don’t have reproducible build systems, so reproducing the exact same > binaries without using Guix is going to be very challenging. > > I don’t know if it is possible and if it would make sense to cheat, > i.e. just lie to Guix about the hashes of the bootstrap binaries. > > ~~ Ricardo > What about taking it a step further and having a multi-level bootstrap process like when we have the core-updates? If we bootstrap away enough times would we end up with the bootstrap binaries we have now? -- Efraim Flashner <efr...@flashner.co.il> אפרים פלשנר GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted
pgplKj80ncqZs.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
