Re: Setting BUILDNAME to a string broke in 3.1.12


Steve Sakoman
 

On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 12:21 AM Henrik Riomar <henrik.riomar@...> wrote:

Hi

On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 1:34 AM Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie@...> wrote:

# Perform any additional adjustments needed to make rootf binary reproducible
rootfs_reproducible () {
if [ "${REPRODUCIBLE_TIMESTAMP_ROOTFS}" != "" ]; then
# Convert UTC into %4Y%2m%2d%2H%2M%2S
sformatted=`date -u -d @${REPRODUCIBLE_TIMESTAMP_ROOTFS} +%4Y%2m%2d%2H%2M%2S`
echo $sformatted > ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/etc/version
bbnote "rootfs_reproducible: set /etc/version to $sformatted"

if [ -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}${sysconfdir}/gconf ]; then
find ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}${sysconfdir}/gconf -name '%gconf.xml' -print0 | xargs -0r \
sed -i -e 's@\bmtime="[0-9][0-9]*"@mtime="'${REPRODUCIBLE_TIMESTAMP_ROOTFS}'"@g'
fi
fi
}

so I'd try setting REPRODUCIBLE_TIMESTAMP_ROOTFS to "". I suspect the change
above started setting that to some value incidentally.
confirmed by commenting out the echo above that that "solves the
issue", so it's in fact this code that is now wrongfully triggered.
I think Richard was suggesting that you add
REPRODUCIBLE_TIMESTAMP_ROOTFS to "" to your local.conf.

I did so and confirmed that /etc/version now has BUILDNAME for its
contents as expected.

Richard is correct that the patch was setting
REPRODUCIBLE_TIMESTAMP_ROOTFS incidentally. This part of Mark's patch
seems to be the cause:

-inherit ${@oe.utils.ifelse(d.getVar('BUILD_REPRODUCIBLE_BINARIES') ==
'1', 'reproducible_build_simple', '')}
+inherit reproducible_build_simple

And reproducible_build_simple does:

BUILD_REPRODUCIBLE_BINARIES = "1"

export PYTHONHASHSEED = "0"
export PERL_HASH_SEED = "0"
export SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH ??= "1520598896"

REPRODUCIBLE_TIMESTAMP_ROOTFS ??= "1520598896"

So it is now overwriting what you've set in local.conf for
BUILD_REPRODUCIBLE_BINARIES. And if you look at your rootfs, you'll
probably see that all of the files are dated March 2019.

Master branch has restructured the code, but retained this behavior.

I'm not sure what the right answer is for dealing with the BUILDNAME
issue. Richard and Mark understand the reproducible build code far
better than I, perhaps they can offer an opinion on what to do here.

Steve

Join yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org to automatically receive all group messages.