[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add support for generating buildinfo file as subpackage (#1532)

[Marek Marczykowski-Górecki]

@marmarek commented on this pull request.



> +# in this Software without prior written authorization of the copyright holder.
+#
+
+set -e -o pipefail
+
+getos() {
+    # shellcheck disable=SC1091
+    test -r /etc/os-release && . /etc/os-release
+    if test -z "${ID}"; then
+        ID="$(cat /etc/system-release)"
+    fi
+    printf '%s' "${ID}"
+}
+
+RPM_BUILD_ROOT="$1"
+RPM_BUILD_DIR="$2"

See [here](https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/OLCD2L6I5KUKWR6WLIUXFUYZ7KAQ66E3/#7QOKE7LUJNG6VJWENGVF7TFEOM2MX7JU) why not src.rpm itself. You don't need to install rpm to get the file, you just need to extract its payload (rpmdev-extract, or any of the other tools).

Why rpm instead of just plain file? Because we've got all the infrastructure and tooling for handling rpms already (Debian decided to ship it as a separate plain file, and _still_ hasn't figured out final solution for distributing them... https://bugs.debian.org/763822).

My concern about putting the buildinfo file (either as a file, or a header tag) into the main binary output itself is possibly harming reproducibility - for example if a package builds reproducible regardless of the host arch, yet the buildinfo includes host arch, then the output won't be reproducible anymore (when you try to reproduce on another host arch). Ideally the buildinfo should not include stuff that isn't relevant for reproducing the specific package, but that set can vary between packages, and IMHO it isn't realistic to maintain this info on per-package basis.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1532#discussion_r960607829
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1532/review/1093325868 at github.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/attachments/20220901/7429915f/attachment.html>