Getting condor builds reproducible

[Tim Theisen]

Now that reproducible builds are mandatory, I am working on getting 
condor to meet those requirements.

I am new to this and slightly confused.

I recently got condor to build reproducibly, as you can see on Salsa:

     https://salsa.debian.org/hpc-team/condor/-/pipelines

And on the package info page, in the  testing migrations section, it 
shows that the amd64 build is reproducible.

     https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/condor

However, on the reproducible results page, it shows the same version is 
not reproducible.

https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/condor.html

So, why is there this disagreement? Is there one that is the 
authoritative answer?

The disagreement seems to be with the NT_GNU_BUILD_ID. I thought that 
the default rules would take care of that with -ffile-prefix-map. One 
suggestion that I was was to link with build_id is sha1. I don't know if 
that is warranted.

Also, once a package is reproducible on one platform, I would expect it 
to be reproducible on other platforms/CPU architectures.

It claims that there was a regression in reproducibility on i386 it that 
is blocking promotion. None of the recent changes should caused this.

What kinds of issues cause a package to not build reproducibly on arm64, 
when it build reproducibly on the amd64 platform.

Any hints are appreciated.

...Tim

-- 
Tim Theisen (he, him, his)
Release Manager
Center for High Throughput Computing
University of Wisconsin - Madison
3695 Morgridge Hall
1205 University Ave
Madison, WI 53706