Many CI reprodibility runs failing with FTBFS on 2nd build

[Holger Levsen]

On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 01:24:47PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> Should be worked around as of yesterday when this commit was deployed:
>   https://salsa.debian.org/qa/jenkins.debian.net/-/commit/a741f156dff8dd2f2a0b6531756865c958ef7fd7
> It will take a while for things to get back to normal... but future
> builds should start working...

I'm not sure this is working as it should, from #debian-reproducible 
just now:

<h01ger> #debian-reproducible-changes shows lots of FTBFS again on tests.r-b.o/debian
<h01ger> https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/unstable/amd64/stats_meta_pkg_state_maint_pkg-r.png also

also I'm busy right now with running https://hamburg2026.mini.debconf.org/
so I'm unable to investigate properly, but #debian-reproducible-changes
still (or again?) shows way too many packages becoming FTBFS *right now*...

if someone could take another look that would be very much appreciated.

> There has been a lot of focus and excitement on the "new" and important
> reproduce.debian.net, which actually verifies against the archive, which
> we have wanted to be able to do for so many years! It really is great!

thanks!
 
> The older tests.reproducible-builds.org serves other purposes
> (e.g. testing toolchain regressions and several important variations
> such as systematic time variation) and still needs some attention now
> and again!

indeed.


-- 
cheers,
	Holger

 ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
 ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
 ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
 ⠈⠳⣄

If you're not angry, you haven't been paying attention.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/reproducible-builds/attachments/20260506/4f568f8a/attachment.sig>