Discussion
Loading...

Post

  • About
  • Code of conduct
  • Privacy
  • About Bonfire
Simon Josefsson
@jas@fosstodon.org  ·  activity timestamp 5 days ago

Guix on Trisquel & Ubuntu for Reproducible CI/CD Artifacts #guix #trisquel #Containers #podman https://blog.josefsson.org/2025/12/03/guix-on-trisquel-ubuntu-for-reproducible-ci-cd-artifacts/

  • Copy link
  • Flag this post
  • Block
Ludovic Courtès
@civodul@toot.aquilenet.fr replied  ·  activity timestamp 5 days ago

@jas Also, the last snippet shows different hashes for ‘guile-gnutls-v5.0.1-src.tar.gz’.

Did you find out why they’re different?

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Simon Josefsson
@jas@fosstodon.org replied  ·  activity timestamp 5 days ago

@civodul Git came from Ubuntu/Trisquel here, I wanted to illustrate that “git-archive” output depends on version and libraries. Ubuntu 22.04 git behave different from Ubuntu 24.04 git. There are at least four different variants in wide use depending on which OS you use (related to git export-subst features and libz vs libz-ng).

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Ludovic Courtès
@civodul@toot.aquilenet.fr replied  ·  activity timestamp 5 days ago

@jas Interesting. Do you know how the two archives differ concretely?

(Disarchive can figure out compression parameters, which might be useful here.)

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Simon Tournier
@zimoun@social.sciences.re replied  ·  activity timestamp 5 days ago

@civodul @jas Well, git-archive depends on the locally installed Tar and GZip versions found in $PATH. Therefore, I’m not surprised that the archives are different when produced by two very different Ubuntu releases (22 vs 24).

Indeed, disarchive could super handy to collect the various “compressed tarball” parameter. Then diff the two “diarchive dissemble“ outputs. 😁

https://git-scm.com/docs/git-archive

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Ludovic Courtès
@civodul@toot.aquilenet.fr replied  ·  activity timestamp 5 days ago

@jas Neat!

One thing I wonder: why use different host distros since the build tools are taken from Guix?

It is tempting to move from ‘guix install’ to ‘guix shell --pure’, then to ‘--container’ or ‘guix build -f guix.scm’, but at that point the host distro doesn’t have any influence on the final result.

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Simon Josefsson
@jas@fosstodon.org replied  ·  activity timestamp 5 days ago

@civodul As for Ubuntu & Trisquel, one aspect is to confirm that Trisquel remains compatible with Ubuntu for producing artifacts. I do not feel comfortable producing artifacts using Ubuntu with all its non-free stuff that may compromise things, and I didn’t feel comfortable switching to (back-then) relatively untested Trisquel images. Building for both and comparing was my way out of that dilemma. 2/2

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Simon Josefsson
@jas@fosstodon.org replied  ·  activity timestamp 5 days ago

@civodul I agree moving towards pure Guix environment is better - I am getting there 😊 These images target building software that use mixed build dependencies, some parts coming from Guix and some from Debian/Trisquel/Ubuntu. My first need for this was LibIDN’s Dot.Net port that required the Mono stack from Debian, although now Guix has that too. 1/2

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Log in

A small Bonfire corner on the internet

This is a small personal instance of Bonfire in the Fediverse.

A small Bonfire corner on the internet: About · Code of conduct · Privacy ·
Bonfire social · 1.0.0 no JS en
Automatic federation enabled
  • Explore
  • About
  • Code of Conduct
Home
Login