[chpatrick]

> but it is not a question of the reproducibility of the binaries (which can change at each build). This binary reproducibility of Nix / NixOS / Nixpkgs is indeed not really tested, at least not systematically.

Isn't that exactly what your first source and OP are about? They check that the binaries are the same when built from the same sources on different machines. The point is exactly that the binaries don't change with every build.

> How are these tested?

> Each build is run twice, at different times, on different hardware running different kernels.

[Reventlov]

Yeah, that represent maybe 1% of the packages in nixpkgs (only the installation iso).

[chpatrick]

Sure but the goal is the same, binary reproducibility, and it is systematic. It's just less far along than Debian.

Also I'm pretty sure a big percent of nixpkgs is already reproducible, we just don't know for sure.

They say the next step might be the GNOME-based ISO, which would be a big achievement because it's basically a full-featured system.