About "Deterministic Builds"

Ever considered writing the compiler in a deterministic way/language?

Then you get the same result every time.

But noo.. that would be actually solve the problem properly. Instead let's put hundreds of hours of effort into carrying around an entire OS in some kind of 'default state' so that all the randomness of your buildsystem in neutralized.

This is programming (aka toiletscrubber retard bricklayer) logic.

How much worse can the software industry get?

>>1

Ever considered writing the compiler in a deterministic way/language?

A custom ld script is enough, the ELF/PE image layout can be (almost) perfectly defined there.

The disadvantage is that one needs to recompile every dependency down to libgcc/mingw, and pull exact same version number (ie 1:1 source code match) of everything. Which is why VM is the lazy/simpler option in the end.

http://nixos.org/
https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/
Next!

>>3
wow amazing contribution to thread!!!!

>>3
Why is everything made by GNU always in alpha stage?

>>4
What, you already knew about it?

>>5
They know good projects always have improvements.

>>5
If it weren't crap, some ebil proprietary capitalist company would steal it.

>>7
Fuck all the way off.

>>2

The disadvantage is that one needs to recompile every dependency

Surely this is only the case if you are linking dependencies statically?

I imagine source changes in header files would be a larger problem. "Same source, same output" is not the same as "same ABI, same output" where the compiler is concerned.

>>5
The alpha designation is supposed to communicate that there's still plenty more work needed before they can consider it usably stable. There are plenty of GNU projects that are release quality.

dubs

>>9

Surely this is only the case if you are linking dependencies statically?

Indeed, but such is the nature of most scenarios of deterministic builds - the result contains every dependency (no matter if object code of the .exe, or as .dll tucked sideways - all of those are to be deterministic). That's win32.

As for the UNIX world, the only time deterministic builds really matter is a static binary - kernel, or -static linked application. Because the rest makes no sense or is indication of really poor understanding of unix (think Ubuntu-only binaries).

Headers = ABI

Sadly not, headers can be and often are much more than mere ABI interfaces - they can contain inlineable code.

You can have #ifdef which depends on the CPU of host compiler machine for example. That ifdef encompasses static inline routine, or a macro which gets instantiated. Meaning you get different result according to host.

Thats why you don't make the distinction between all headers and the application using those - they can be treated as one and the same.

>>12

such is the nature of most scenarios of deterministic builds - the result contains every dependency (no matter if object code of the .exe, or as .dll tucked sideways - all of those are to be deterministic). That's win32.

But that's wrong. It's totally possible to dynamically link executables on Windows. In fact, most libraries that are supplied by Microsoft will be linked dynamically by default.

As for the UNIX world, the only time deterministic builds really matter is a static binary - kernel, or -static linked application. Because the rest makes no sense or is indication of really poor understanding of unix (think Ubuntu-only binaries).

I have no idea what you're trying to say here. The overwhelming majority of code that is shipped by the major distributions is dynamically linked, and people care very much that it can all be built deterministically.

Sadly not, headers can be and often are much more than mere ABI interfaces - they can contain inlineable code.

Which was my point. Trivial ABI preserving changes to headers will affect the final build output, and that is unfortunate.

None of this implies that every load time dependency needs to be present in the exact same version for a build to be deterministic, as you appear to be suggesting.

program is written in javascript
requires virtualizing an entire operating system with 'docker' to "compile" it
javascript
compile it

what tH EFUCK THAW WHAT THE FUCK
WHY

>>14
Weird quote. Who said that?

program is written in javascript
requires virtualizing an entire operating system with 'docker' to "compile" it
javascript
compile it

>>15
I did.

>>16
Why are you breaking down your text like that? It looks pretty weird. Were you not taught to write texts in school?

>>15
>>17
I miss the Internet before this meme. It's worse than furfags and bronies combined.

>>14
WHO U QUOT THO

>>18
Don't worry, the folks at http://boards.4chan.org/g/ don't use this meme at all! You might want to spend your time there.

>>18
We also miss the Internet before this >green meme.

>>17
>>18
>>19
>>20
>>21
5 posts of nigger shit replies. you could just not.

>>22
5 unoptimized quotes, you could just not.

>>23
Some people try too hard to fit in.

try too hard to fit in my anus

Why are there so many Haskell programmers (>>25) around lately?

>>26
it must have been linked on reddit r/haskell
I always thought /prog/ could never die but maybe there reall is a cancer for everything and we're seeing it eat away at our community now.

Stop using Haskell!
Haskell programmers leave!

>>1
HEY PROFESSOR, GO SHOVE A BEAVER UP YOUR BUTT