Stewart X Addison

> > @henning410 seems to fail lots of checks > Unrelated to this PR, but fix is here: https://github.com/adoptium/temurin-build/pull/3638 Great! A rebase operation on this PR should resolve them now...

> * x86_64Linux : https://ci.adoptium.net/job/build-scripts/job/jobs/job/jdk21u/job/jdk21u-linux-x64-temurin/113/console We should make sure to copy the relevant parts of the logs into the issue so that they are captured when the jobs expire. Here...

> @sxa interesting x86_64 has less pkgs ? > > x86_64 linux output: I'll go back to my default example for this that shoud be investigated as a good test...

[EDIT: Hiding this comment as it was user error on checkout] > ~Can this functionality be added as an option to makejdk-any-platform.sh similar to `--create-sbom`?~ Ah - looks like it's...

If I run a build with `BUILD_ARGS=--enable-sbom-strace` then I get `BUILD_CONFIG[ENABLE_SBOM_STRACE]="true"` in the logs but I don't seem to have any lines with `pkg` in the output - where should...

> For nightly builds, do we really need to rename the artifact timestamps so they all match ? As we're invalidating the signed SBOM as a consequence... IMHO it's confusing...

The work in https://github.com/adoptium/ci-jenkins-pipelines/issues/902 is expected to fix this.

Looking at the above list I have a couple of questions ... 1. Why can't we retain the version number from the download? Deliberately removing it then holding a separate...

> Because it seemed simpler to me than attempting to parse the file name, especially since the getDependencies script already holds the versions separate. I still feel that renaming the...

Also do we have a solution for being able to pull an old version when required (for example when doing a reproducible build of an older release which may need...