[External] Changing the os-release BUILD_ID back to its default value of DATETIME

[Patrick Williams]

On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 03:17:06PM -0500, Adriana Kobylak wrote:
> Thanks everybody. Changes up for review:
> 
> https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/openbmc/+/48204 <https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/openbmc/+/48204>
> https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/openbmc/+/48205 <https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/openbmc/+/48205>
> 
> 
> > On Oct 12, 2021, at 4:45 AM, William Kennington <wak at google.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Personally I would rather have deterministic builds and don't like
> > arbitrary build timestamp injection into images. But we can announce
> > the plan to change this behavior and adjust build processes
> > accordingly.
> 
> Sounds like a plan. To keep the current behavior, I tested that adding a os-release.bbappend with BUILD_ID set to the current git command would build the image with the value as it is today.

I don't actually have very strong opinions on this and didn't realize right away
that this meant we _weren't_ making a change.  I avoided weighing in before to
just be another "+1".

Shouldn't we attempt to match what upstream Yocto does?  Doesn't doing (mostly)
nothing cause us to not fix the usability issue that keeps getting raised about
the code-update flow not accepting a simple rebuild?

I don't believe that you can currently make a 100% reproducible build as it is,
so I don't see this as a hard requirement to deviate from Yocto and if someone
does want to avoid a changing BUILD_ID we already give them the tools for it.

-- 
Patrick Williams
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/attachments/20211027/2c66912f/attachment.sig>