Debian Bug report logs -#848721
apt: please make the moo reproducible
Package:src:apt; Maintainer forsrc:apt is APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org> ;
Reported by: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 20:00:01 UTC
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Found in version apt/1.4~beta2
Reply orsubscribe to this bug.
Toggle useless messages
View this report as anmbox folder, status mbox , maintainer mbox
Report forwardedto debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, reproducible-bugs@lists.alioth.debian.org, APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org> :
Bug#848721 ; Package src:apt . (Mon, 19 Dec 2016 20:00:04 GMT)Full text andrfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sentto Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org> :
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to reproducible-bugs@lists.alioth.debian.org, APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org> . (Mon, 19 Dec 2016 20:00:04 GMT)Full text andrfc822 format available.
received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox , reply ):
From: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: apt: please make the moo reproducible
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 20:57:57 +0100
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)] Source: apt Version: 1.4~beta2 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: timestamps randomness X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-bugs@lists.alioth.debian.org Hi, Whilst working on the Reproducible Builds effort [0], we noticed that apt could not moo reproducibly. Patch attached. [0] https://reproducible-builds.org/ Regards, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk `- [apt.diff.txt (text/plain, attachment)]Information forwardedto debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org> :
Bug#848721 ; Package src:apt . (Fri, 30 Dec 2016 21:33:04 GMT)Full text andrfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sentto David Kalnischkies <david@kalnischkies.de> :
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org> . (Fri, 30 Dec 2016 21:33:04 GMT)Full text andrfc822 format available.
received at 848721@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox , reply ):
From: David Kalnischkies <david@kalnischkies.de>
To: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>, 848721@bugs.debian.org
Cc: reproducible-bugs@lists.alioth.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#848721: apt: please make the moo reproducible
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 22:30:42 +0100
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)] Good day mere mortal, On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 08:57:57PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote: > Whilst working on the Reproducible Builds effort [0], we noticed > that apt could not moo reproducibly. Your prayer has been received by deity@ … > Patch attached. … but your sacrifice is not enough. Given your intend is on changing the behavior of the cow itself, the cow usually expects full dedication to the cause with mandatory minimum service periods and probation. Enlisting your first born child in the service of the cow might be an acceptable alternative. Failing that your prayer has to change to be considered worthy and find support by a current member of the inner circle: > static std::string getMooLine() { /*{{{*/ > - time_t const timenow = time(NULL); > + time_t const timenow = GetTimeNow(); On a nitpick level the cow feels kinda tricked by a method named GetTimeNow to report not always the time now, but what an external has forced. GetSecondsSinceEpoch() might be better. > struct tm special; > localtime_r(&timenow, &special); > enum { NORMAL, PACKAGEMANAGER, APPRECIATION, AGITATION, AIRBORN } line; > @@ -163,7 +164,8 @@ bool DoMooApril(CommandLine &) /*{{{*/ > /*}}}*/ > bool DoMoo(CommandLine &CmdL) /*{{{*/ > { > - time_t const timenow = time(NULL); > + const time_t timenow = GetTimeNow(); Asking the lord of time two times in the same meditation is considered bad style especially now that this can generate errors. The cow suggests passing time forward as parameter. > + const char *source_date_epoch = getenv("SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH"); > + > + if (!source_date_epoch) { > + return time(NULL); > + } The cow dislikes the '!' as it is easy to miss and prefers the far noisier "== nullptr" here. It also prefers its curly brackets on new lines even through even its current followers tend to dislike it, but inertia (as it is so common for cows to be "cowheaded"). The followers advice is dropping the curly brackets for these one-line ifs to make them all happy. > + errno = 0; > + char *endptr; > + const unsigned long long epoch = strtoull(source_date_epoch, &endptr, 10); The speaker wonders how reproducible such a call is if it is effected by LANG or is that just "bad environment setup"? And while we are at it a minor nitpick: We prefer the const-modifier to be set after the type. > + if ((errno == ERANGE && (epoch == ULLONG_MAX || epoch == 0)) > + || (errno != 0 && epoch == 0)) { > + _error->Error("SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH: strtoull: %s\n", strerror(errno)); > + } Using _error->Errno here would be more consistent. > + if (endptr == source_date_epoch) { > + _error->Error("SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH: No digits were found: %s\n", endptr); > + } > + if (*endptr != '\0') { > + _error->Error("SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH: Trailing garbage: %s\n", endptr); > + } At least some of the if's might be better of as else if's as they can produce incorrect messages e.g. if the cow itself operates it: E: SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH: No digits were found: moo E: SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH: Trailing garbage: moo Also, far more strange perhaps: E: SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH: No digits were found: m00 E: SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH: Trailing garbage: m00 The message style is a bit uncommon for apt in general. Unlikely that a human is going to encounter them a lot, but perhaps something like: Environment variable SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH has invalid value "%s" (not starting with digits, trailing garbage, …). > + if (epoch > ULONG_MAX) { > + _error->Error("SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH: %llu must be <= %lu", epoch, ULONG_MAX); > + } Why is that so that we add pain for our grand-grand-grand-…-children but support our grand-grand-grand-…-parents parsing a long long future and past, but accepting only a long future in the end? The cow fears this is an attempt at making it say something which could be interpreted as "You don't need to talk about the (far) future, as there is none for mankind", but much like the god of the christian faith(s) it likes to put enormous trust into mankind to fix their ways desperate an endless stream of facts to the contrary. We hence do expect an explanatory comment at the minimum. > + return (time_t) epoch; we should be using a c++-style cast here: static_cast<time_t>(epoch) It makes no practical difference here, but its good style to declare explicitly what cast is needed to avoid problems down the road if the "this obviously never changes" code ever gets rewritten. With all these errors previously I wonder if its a good idea to still be using epoch value btw. Also: As this is adding a non-trivial amount of code to a much beloved and very important feature it would be in your best interest to add some very basic tests for this [for you] obviously very important behaviour so future incarnations do not (re)break reproducibility of moo. You may add them to test/integration/test-00-commands-have-help as a (reproducible) cow is obviously a great help. Moo, David Kalnischkies, Metatron of the Cow the cow accepts followers of any age, race, origin and gender but its followers primarily consist of slowly ageing caucasian human males at the moment so the cow would prefer a higher biodiversity. out of character: you might have guessed from the message style that I don't consider it 100% serious and mission critical but if for some reason that is false judgement just say so. [signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]Send a report that this bug log contains spam .
Debian bug tracking system administrator < owner@bugs.debian.org >. Last modified:Sat Dec 31 16:05:45 2016; Machine Name:buxtehudeDebian Bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O