-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 182
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Reproducibility: pkg_deb_impl with postinst and postrm attribute results in unpredictable control.tar.gz file #114
Comments
The following patch seems to fix this for me.
I am new to Github and don't know, how to send this in correctly. But it is trivial anyway. |
andreas-0815-qwertz
added a commit
to andreas-0815-qwertz/rules_pkg
that referenced
this issue
Nov 29, 2019
Replacing plain Python dict by an OrderedDict for Python versions before 3.7, so that iteration order of "extrafiles" is determined by insertion order. Since 3.7 iteration order of plain dict itself is stable. bazelbuild#114
aiuto
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 19, 2020
Replacing plain Python dict by an OrderedDict for Python versions before 3.7, so that iteration order of "extrafiles" is determined by insertion order. Since 3.7 iteration order of plain dict itself is stable. #114
Fixed in #120 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Description of the problem / feature request:
Using
in my WORKSPACE together with a homegrown wrapper macro for
pkg_deb_impl
results in a non-predictable file order of the postinst and postrm scripts in the generated
control.tar.gz
, when used in a target definition likeWhen I am building the target twice in a row with an intermediate
bazel clean
, I get the output attached with diffoscope 78.atos-A-TraceCfg-0.3.0.0-powerpc.html.gz
Bugs: what's the simplest, easiest way to reproduce this bug? Please provide a minimal example if possible.
Please see description above.
What operating system are you running Bazel on?
Debian GNU/Linux 9.11
What's the output of
bazel info release
?release 1.1.0
(using bazelisk 1.1.0)
If
bazel info release
returns "development version" or "(@non-git)", tell us how you built Bazel.n.a.
What's the output of
git remote get-url origin ; git rev-parse master ; git rev-parse HEAD
?n.a.
Have you found anything relevant by searching the web?
No, sorry.
Any other information, logs, or outputs that you want to share?
see attachment.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: