Re: Reproducible builds: genbki.pl vs schemapg.h

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Christoph Berg <christoph(dot)berg(at)credativ(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reproducible builds: genbki.pl vs schemapg.h
Date: 2017-12-15 23:21:41
Message-ID: 20171215232141.gx7mkxriaduocxm2@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2017-12-16 07:52:41 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 3:13 AM, Christoph Berg
> <christoph(dot)berg(at)credativ(dot)de> wrote:
> > Re: Tom Lane 2017-12-15 <9616(dot)1513351766(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> >> Christoph Berg <christoph(dot)berg(at)credativ(dot)de> writes:
> >> > Debian's reproducible builds project has revealed that the full build
> >> > path gets embedded into server/catalog/schemapg.h:
> >>
> >> genbki.pl is hardly our only script that prints its $0 ...
> >
> > As per
> > https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/postgresql-10.html,
> > that's the only place that makes it into the resulting binary.
> > I wouldn't be sending a patch if it didn't fix the issue.
>
> Why not fixing that? Reproducible builds are a trend of these days,
> and what's proposed here is really simple to make PG more compliant
> with this purpose in mind.

It's not like $0 instead of a hardcoded name in the header actually buys
us anything afaict.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2017-12-15 23:36:00 Re: Reproducible builds: genbki.pl vs schemapg.h
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2017-12-15 22:52:41 Re: Reproducible builds: genbki.pl vs schemapg.h