Determinism in the projectbluefin Actions Factory#

Philosophy#

Determinism in the factory means: same inputs → same outputs. A deterministic build system ensures that rebuilding the same image from the same source code and pinned dependencies produces byte-for-byte identical artifacts. This enables reproducible testing, verifiable releases, and confidence that a known-good build can be replicated.

Non-determinism falls into three categories:

1. Acceptable drift — sources outside our control; document and monitor
2. Already pinned — surface is locked; verify and maintain
3. Under investigation — requires fixes or trade-off decisions

Gold Standards (Model These Patterns)#

1. SHA-locking in weekly testing promotion (bluefin/.github/workflows/weekly-testing-promotion.yml)#

Pattern: Before promoting a testing build to stable, lock the main branch HEAD SHA:

SHA=$(gh api repos/${{ github.repository }}/git/ref/heads/main --jq '.object.sha')

Then verify that e2e tests passed on that exact SHA before proceeding. This ensures:

• No hidden commits between decision point and build
• Reproducible promotion logic
• Auditable trail (SHA is part of workflow state)

Why it works: Git SHAs are immutable content hashes. Once locked, the repository state is deterministic.

2. Pinned build engine in dakota (dakota/.github/actions/check-bst2-pin/)#

Pattern: BuildStream 2 (the compilation engine) is pinned to an exact container image SHA in both the Justfile and CI workflow:

just_sha="$(grep -oE 'bst2:[a-f0-9]{40}' Justfile)"
track_sha="$(grep -oE 'bst2:[a-f0-9]{40}' .github/workflows/track-bst-sources.yml)"

A CI check enforces they match. This ensures:

• Compiler version cannot drift between local and CI builds
• BST2 updates are deliberate and synchronized
• Reproducible builds across all developers and CI runners

Why it works: Container image SHAs are immutable. Pinning the builder guarantees identical compilation behavior.

Acceptable Drift (Document, Do Not Eliminate)#

1. Upstream RPM versions#

Surface: Fedora updates base packages daily. Builds on different dates pull different RPM versions.

Why acceptable:

• Pinning every RPM creates maintenance burden
• Security updates are critical and frequent
• dnf cache action mitigates by reusing cached layers
• Latest-stable is the right policy for desktop OS (Bluefin)

Mitigation:

• DNF cache in reusable workflow reduces re-download of unchanged packages
• Document expected drift in release notes
• Run weekly e2e testing to catch breakage early

Status: ✅ Intentional, monitored via weekly CI

2. Cron schedule timing and runner OS freshness#

Surface: GitHub Actions runners are updated weekly; cron: '0 6 * * 2' may run on different patch levels of Ubuntu 24.04.

Why acceptable:

• Runner OS updates are security-critical
• Patch-level differences in Ubuntu are minimal (same kernel ABI)
• Workflow runs at consistent UTC time, not wall-clock time

Mitigation:

• Document runner image version in build logs
• Use stable runner labels (ubuntu-24.04, ubuntu-24.04-arm)
• Monitor for runner-specific failures in e2e tests

Status: ✅ Acceptable, runner selection is deliberate

3. Container storage initialization order#

Surface: BTRFS loopback mount (setup-runner input storage-backend: btrfs) initializes before each build. Mount options and loopback device numbering vary between runs.

Why acceptable:

• BTRFS initialization is stable and repeatable on the same runner
• The compressed filesystem is transparent to the build
• Layer ordering inside a built image is deterministic (controlled by build tool)

Mitigation:

• Use compress-force=zstd:2 to ensure consistent compression
• Verify in smoke tests that layer digests match between builds
• Monitor for storage-related flakes in CI

Status: ✅ Acceptable, reproducible within same runner pool

Already Pinned (Verify and Maintain)#

1. Third-party action SHAs in all composite actions#

Pattern: Every uses: reference in bootc-build/*/action.yml and .github/workflows/reusable-build.yml must be pinned to a full commit SHA with a version comment. No floating tags (@main, @v3, @latest).

How to verify the repo is clean:

# Find any floating tags — should return nothing
grep -r 'uses:' bootc-build/ .github/workflows/ \
  | grep -v '@[0-9a-f]\{40\}'

How to verify a SHA comment is accurate (not a pre-release branch tip):

# Check that the comment tag exists as a real release, not just a branch ref
gh release view v6.0.3 --repo actions/checkout --json tagName
# If no release exists, use: # no-release, <landmark> (YYYY-MM)

Version comment rules:

• Use the exact release tag: # v6.0.3 not # v6
• For repos with no releases/tags: # no-release, Merge PR #N (YYYY-MM)
• Renovate bumps SHAs in consuming repos — the canonical pins live here

Chunkah container SHA:

• Version and digest both pinned in chunka/action.yml (CHUNKAH_VERSION + CHUNKAH_SHA)
• Bump both together when upgrading — they derive the image ref and the Containerfile.splitter URL

Dakota BST2 pin:

• Enforced by dakota/.github/actions/check-bst2-pin/ consistency check
• Pinned in both Justfile and workflow — CI blocks drift

Open Investigations#

1. Chunkah reproducibility#

Question: Does chunkah produce identical rechunked images from identical inputs?

Context:

• Chunkah is an external tool (coreos/chunkah, container-based)
• Layer ordering is stable
• OCI layer digests are checked (line 55 in chunka/action.yml: ostree.components annotations)
• Test suite: rechunk step in reusable workflow verifies metadata preserved (lines 418–432)

Current mitigation:

• Full SHA pin on container image
• Verify annotations preserved in reusable workflow
• Layer digests logged for debugging

Next steps:

• Compare digests of rechunked images across two identical builds (same source, same runner pool)
• If drift detected, file issue on coreos/chunkah with reproducible case

Status: 🟡 Assumption of determinism, not yet verified empirically

2. SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH in Containerfile builds#

Question: Are Containerfile builds using SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH to pin timestamps?

Analysis:

• Neither bluefin nor dakota sets SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH in Containerfiles or Justfiles
• Podman respects it if set in the runner environment, but it is not set
• Timestamps (e.g., file mtimes inside built images) may vary between runs

Impact:

• Minimal for bootc images (timestamps in /etc are not part of runtime state)
• Relevant for SBOM metadata (generation timestamp is recorded)
• Could affect reproducible builds if using timestamps for verification

Current mitigation:

• SBOM generation captures workflow run timestamp separately
• Attestations include build metadata (run ID, timestamp)

Next steps:

1. Verify that OSTree commit hashes are deterministic (not timestamp-dependent)
2. If needed, set SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH=$(git log -1 --format=%ct) in build steps
3. Pin in consuming repos if cross-repo reproducibility is required

Status: 🟡 Not yet set; investigate if needed for reproducibility requirement

3. AT-SPI test flakes in e2e testing#

Question: Why do Accessibility (AT-SPI) tests occasionally fail in e2e runs?

Context:

• post-testing-e2e runs smoke tests before weekly promotion
• AT-SPI dbus initialization can be timing-sensitive
• Runs on shared GitHub Actions runners with variable load

Current mitigation:

• Rerun button available if flake occurs
• Monitoring in project board for test stability

Next steps:

• Add AT-SPI service availability check to e2e harness
• Consider longer timeout for accessibility tests
• Log detailed dbus trace on failure

Status: 🟡 Known intermittent; needs CI harness improvement

Audit Schedule and Ownership#

How to Use This File#

• Floating tag found in a new workflow? → Flag under "Critical: must fix" and add to actionlint check
• Need to update a pinned action? → Search this file for the action name, verify new SHA, update with version comment
• New non-deterministic surface discovered? → Add to the appropriate section and create a tracking issue
• Investigation resolved? → Move section to "Already pinned" with mitigation summary

Related Reading#

• docs/skills/composite-actions.md — SHA pinning conventions and adding new actions
• docs/skills/consumer-guide.md — How consuming repos stay in sync with factory updates
• bluefin/.github/workflows/weekly-testing-promotion.yml — Gold standard for SHA-locking
• dakota/.github/actions/check-bst2-pin/ — Gold standard for builder pinning