Michał Kowalczyk

> We could move this to `Discussions -> Ideas`? Sounds good, will do.

Not a bug in Gramine (see @llly's comment above), closing.

@oshogbo: Could you add a short comment there explaining why this test is disabled on SGX? Otherwise we'll have this very discussion again in a year :)

> @dimakuv The proposed sanity check still looks reasonable to me even w/o the issue reproduction, do we want to move it forward? Thanks! I'd say this could be even...

Is this still relevant with EDMM getting more and more popular?

> Even with EDMM not all workloads will use it Why not? After software support gets more mature it should be better or equal to non-EDMM SGX in all aspects?...

> We could move this to `Discussions -> Ideas`? Sounds good, will do.

Nope, this one is completely different? Your document is describing current Gramine state and limitations from the compatibility point of view, the one here is about security. Although reading it...

First step would be to build Gramine on a few different machines / OSes (but the same compiler version) and find all moving parts (e.g. timestamps embedded in some binary...

@lead4good: One difference I can see is that one `libsysdb.so` contains BuildInfo and the other doesn't: ``` + 0x00077d80 61656664 35643038 37356334 66646637 aefd5d0875c4fdf7 + 0x00077d90 36656464 36376635 30343339 35326264...