You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Now, keeping WF_SRC_DIR macro is causing different files (to be more concrete, different config.h) being generated when the build src dir is different, which breaks the reproducible build initiative that aims to make software robustly generate bit-to-bit identical binaries during build.
If WF_SRC_DIR is not to be used for future Wayfire, I am wondering if it can be removed from upstream code base. If it will be kept, please let me know so that we can patch out this line from config.h with confidence. Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently
config.h.in
defines the macroWF_SRC_DIR
, which hardcodes the source code directory path during build:wayfire/config.h.in
Line 6 in ce3a37c
wayfire/meson.build
Line 77 in ce3a37c
However, it seems that
WF_SRC_DIR
is not used anywhere in the wayfire project. Looking at project history, it was introduced for debugging at eb735a0...but its actual use was later removed. As seen in https://github.com/WayfireWM/wayfire/search?q=WF_SRC_DIR , no real code is using this macro.
Now, keeping
WF_SRC_DIR
macro is causing different files (to be more concrete, differentconfig.h
) being generated when the build src dir is different, which breaks the reproducible build initiative that aims to make software robustly generate bit-to-bit identical binaries during build.You may find downstream distribution bug report at https://bugs.debian.org/1016486 . An analysis on current wayfire's reproducibility in Debian can be found at https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/wayfire.html .
If
WF_SRC_DIR
is not to be used for future Wayfire, I am wondering if it can be removed from upstream code base. If it will be kept, please let me know so that we can patch out this line fromconfig.h
with confidence. Thanks!The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: