Re: Updating plans of lang/ghc

["OBATA Akio" <obata%lins.jp@localhost>]

On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 11:59:33 +0900, PHO <pho%cielonegro.org@localhost> wrote:

> From: David Holland <dholland-pkgtech%netbsd.org@localhost>
> Subject: Re: Updating plans of lang/ghc
> Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 19:24:34 +0000
>
> >  > Well... I'm puzzled. Are you saying I have to prove that machines I
> >  > used to build my kits were not trojanized by any means? Obviously I
> >  > can't. No one on the earth can prove such things.
> >
> > No, only that you've taken reasonable (or equivalently, adequately
> > paranoid) steps to be careful about securing the machines involved and
> > not exposed the builds to known hazards.
> >
> > (Cloud hosting is one known hazard, for example, that's probably best
> > avoided for any binaries like this.)
>
> Okay. Here's an updated summary of my bootstrap kits:
>
> * NetBSD/amd64, FreeBSD/i386, Darwin/ppc [SAFE]: These kits were built
>   on my secured private machines under my exclusive control.
>
> * Linux/amd64 [UNSAFE]: I built my kit for this one on a machine
>   shared with my co-workers with root access.
>
> * NetBSD/i386 [UNSAFE]: I built my kit for this one on an Amazon EC2
>   instance (although it's private).

Then, at least, is it OK to put bootstrap binary kits for
NetBSD/amd64, FreeBSD/i386, Darwin/ppc?

Probably, about bootstrap kit, same situation with lang/openjdk7.
But I cannot find how current openjdk7 bootstrap binaries was allowed.
Anyone know where I can see such discussion?

--
OBATA Akio / obata%lins.jp@localhost