Re: Bug#960590: wolfssl: please make the libwolfssl.a file reproducible

[Chris Lamb]

Felix,

> I would like to ask upstream to revert [1], but Ubuntu is a
> Debian-derivative. Should our binutils be built differently (or have
> they changed since [1] was authored)?

I read this question as a false dichotomy, or at we are focusing on
the wrong thing here. Let us take a few steps back -- here are my
assumptions and inferences, do let me know if any of them are wrong:

  * We do not want these timestamps inside the .ar archive.

  * It appears that wolfssl wishes to include them (infered from their
    inclusion of "U")

  * The "ignored" message is a warning, not an error. On my local
    system it does not appear to cause a failure to create an ar
    archive.

  * Debian has configured binutils with --enable-deterministic-
    archives since March 2015.

>From a narrow point of view, I do not mind what steps are taken so
that wolfssl does not embed this metadata, but I sincerely doubt
asking binutils to change a compile flag is the right way to go (or
will be effective).


Regards,

-- 
      ,''`.
     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
     `. `'`      lamby at debian.org 🍥 chris-lamb.co.uk
       `-