GNU bug report logs - #30210
pandoc not reproducible

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 30210 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 30210 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus <at> mdc-berlin.de>
To: <bug-guix <at> gnu.org>
Subject: pandoc not reproducible
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 19:09:21 +0100

The ghc-pandoc package for version 1.17.2 cannot be built reproducibly.

Message #8 received at 30210 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus <at> mdc-berlin.de>
To: <30210 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: pandoc not reproducible
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 08:58:33 +0100

The only file that differs is this:

  /gnu/store/8ynsssfjjdjbawndmjlnjlqrh027rl9g-ghc-pandoc-1.17.2-check/lib/ghc-7.10.2/ghc-pandoc-1.17.2.conf.d/package.cache
  /gnu/store/8ynsssfjjdjbawndmjlnjlqrh027rl9g-ghc-pandoc-1.17.2/lib/ghc-7.10.2/ghc-pandoc-1.17.2.conf.d/package.cache

I wonder if we should expect that other Haskell packages are also
affected by this.

--
Ricardo

Message #11 received at 30210 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus <at> mdc-berlin.de>
To: <30210 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: pandoc not reproducible
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 23:04:57 +0100

> The only file that differs is this:
>
>   /gnu/store/8ynsssfjjdjbawndmjlnjlqrh027rl9g-ghc-pandoc-1.17.2-check/lib/ghc-7.10.2/ghc-pandoc-1.17.2.conf.d/package.cache
>   /gnu/store/8ynsssfjjdjbawndmjlnjlqrh027rl9g-ghc-pandoc-1.17.2/lib/ghc-7.10.2/ghc-pandoc-1.17.2.conf.d/package.cache

At least they seem to contain the same strings albeit in a different
order.  “diff <(strings a|sort) <(strings b|sort)” shows no
differences.  (Of course there could be other differences than order,
which simply don’t appear to be strings.)

> I wonder if we should expect that other Haskell packages are also
> affected by this.

Other packages also have a “package.cache”, but I don’t think they are
used.  The build system creates a new temporary “package.cache” file for
all Haskell packages, and we have a profile hook that creates such a
file for when Haskell packages are installed to profiles.

Could we maybe just delete “package.cache” after the installation phase?

(Even if we can make our packages appear to be deterministic, will they
really be?  This GHC bug sounds bad for us:
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4012)

--
Ricardo

Message #14 received at 30210 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus <at> mdc-berlin.de>
Cc: 30210 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#30210: pandoc not reproducible
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 15:49:54 +0100

Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus <at> mdc-berlin.de> skribis:

>> The only file that differs is this:
>>
>>   /gnu/store/8ynsssfjjdjbawndmjlnjlqrh027rl9g-ghc-pandoc-1.17.2-check/lib/ghc-7.10.2/ghc-pandoc-1.17.2.conf.d/package.cache
>>   /gnu/store/8ynsssfjjdjbawndmjlnjlqrh027rl9g-ghc-pandoc-1.17.2/lib/ghc-7.10.2/ghc-pandoc-1.17.2.conf.d/package.cache
>
> At least they seem to contain the same strings albeit in a different
> order.  “diff <(strings a|sort) <(strings b|sort)” shows no
> differences.  (Of course there could be other differences than order,
> which simply don’t appear to be strings.)

That sounds like code using readdir(2) and not sorting the returned
entries, as was the case for gtk-update-icon-cache or whatever it’s
called.

Ludo’.

Message #17 received at 30210 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Cc: 30210 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus <at> mdc-berlin.de>
Subject: Re: bug#30210: pandoc not reproducible
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 15:03:20 +0100

ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus <at> mdc-berlin.de> skribis:
>
>>> The only file that differs is this:
>>>
>>>   /gnu/store/8ynsssfjjdjbawndmjlnjlqrh027rl9g-ghc-pandoc-1.17.2-check/lib/ghc-7.10.2/ghc-pandoc-1.17.2.conf.d/package.cache
>>>   /gnu/store/8ynsssfjjdjbawndmjlnjlqrh027rl9g-ghc-pandoc-1.17.2/lib/ghc-7.10.2/ghc-pandoc-1.17.2.conf.d/package.cache
>>
>> At least they seem to contain the same strings albeit in a different
>> order.  “diff <(strings a|sort) <(strings b|sort)” shows no
>> differences.  (Of course there could be other differences than order,
>> which simply don’t appear to be strings.)
>
> That sounds like code using readdir(2) and not sorting the returned
> entries, as was the case for gtk-update-icon-cache or whatever it’s
> called.

This package.cache problem has been fixed with commit
5de93cdba77db3777f8f026c029acadd7b8bdde3.

Unfortunately it is now bin/pandoc that differs across builds.

--
Ricardo

Message #20 received at 30210 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus <at> mdc-berlin.de>
Cc: 30210 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#30210: pandoc not reproducible
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 17:28:54 +0100

Hi Ricardo,


On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 at 19:09, Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus <at> mdc-berlin.de> wrote:
> The ghc-pandoc package for version 1.17.2 cannot be built reproducibly.

On my machine, with Guix cb68ae6, the usual:

  guix build pandoc –no-grafts
  guix build pandoc –no-grafts –check

does not report a reproducibility issue.  Idem with ghc-pandoc.

Since, Pandoc is at 2.7.3 and without the parallel Haskell build system,
it should be reproducible, I guess.

Could you confirm?  If ok for you, this bug report could be close.


All the best,
simon

Message #25 received at 30210-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sarah Morgensen <iskarian <at> mgsn.dev>
To: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
Cc: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, 30210-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#30210: pandoc not reproducible
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2021 18:41:32 -0700

Hello,

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net> writes:

> ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus <at> mdc-berlin.de> skribis:
>>
>>>> The only file that differs is this:
>>>>
>>>>   /gnu/store/8ynsssfjjdjbawndmjlnjlqrh027rl9g-ghc-pandoc-1.17.2-check/lib/ghc-7.10.2/ghc-pandoc-1.17.2.conf.d/package.cache
>>>>   /gnu/store/8ynsssfjjdjbawndmjlnjlqrh027rl9g-ghc-pandoc-1.17.2/lib/ghc-7.10.2/ghc-pandoc-1.17.2.conf.d/package.cache
>>>
>>> At least they seem to contain the same strings albeit in a different
>>> order.  “diff <(strings a|sort) <(strings b|sort)” shows no
>>> differences.  (Of course there could be other differences than order,
>>> which simply don’t appear to be strings.)
>>
>> That sounds like code using readdir(2) and not sorting the returned
>> entries, as was the case for gtk-update-icon-cache or whatever it’s
>> called.
>
> This package.cache problem has been fixed with commit
> 5de93cdba77db3777f8f026c029acadd7b8bdde3.
>
> Unfortunately it is now bin/pandoc that differs across builds.
>
> --
> Ricardo

I found this old bug.  I tested both pandoc and ghc-pandoc and it looks
like this is no longer an issue (perhaps fixed partially in #43834), so
I'm closing.  Please reopen otherwise.

Thanks,
--
Sarah

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.