Bug#886736: diffoscope: mach-o disassembly with otool can fail in a way that fools diffoscope into dumping raw data instead

Mike Hommey mh at glandium.org
Wed Jan 10 01:42:34 UTC 2018

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 10:23:59AM +0900, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 01:07:58PM +0000, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > Hi Mike,
> > 
> > > I only have a very large XUL library... you probably don't want that.
> > 
> > Probably not for the testsuite (!) but if you could make it available it
> > would help with a fix anyway...
> The two builds I was comparing:
> https://queue.taskcluster.net/v1/task/AKmfRsZPQjqkc7ZoBmS2zw/runs/0/artifacts/public/build/target.dmg
> https://queue.taskcluster.net/v1/task/Hs2lbc9dTFi4eXjwwM26NA/runs/0/artifacts/public/build/target.dmg
> The corresponding diff:
> https://queue.taskcluster.net/v1/task/QRazQl4PQZeuiU81C9PtlA/runs/0/artifacts/public/diff.html
> Note that the actual diff you get is:
> https://queue.taskcluster.net/v1/task/Uhv3G5XUQA6DDFrOhErA9Q/runs/0/artifacts/public/diff.html
> which has more differences. Stripping the binaries first gets the first
> diff. I should probably file another bug about that, those differences
> show up when comparing nm -a output.

BTW, since I'm also looking at where those differences are coming from,
the first one in the first diff is a UUID difference that appears in the
otool -l output.


More information about the Reproducible-builds mailing list