[Reproducible-builds] Reproducible Builds — proof of concept successful for 83% of all sources in main

[Paul Gevers]

Hi,

I applaud this initiative.

On 13-02-15 18:28, Reproducible builds folks wrote:
> If you want to help, a first step is to check the reproducibility of
> your packages [DDLIST]. Feel free to ask for help on the
> <reproducible-builds at lists.alioth.debian.org> mailing list or in
> #debian-reproducible on irc.debian.org.

It would help me if you would have mentioned here what you expect people
to do when their package is not reproducible, but when this is the
result of other packages that they use during building. I am not going
to fix my packages if e.g. the timestamp in the documentation is
inserted by the use of formatXtoFormatY, we should then rather focus on
fixing formatXtoFormatY. I believe you agree. If people all start fixing
such issues inside their own package than in some time we have all kind
of solutions, which may (or may not) bit-rot and may not be needed if we
fix formatXtoFormatY.

I remember that I implemented something along these lines to allow
multiarch libraries where there was also some documentation that wasn't
worth splitting off. I would be glad if I remember that when the
formatXtoFormatY in question is fixed.

Paul

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/reproducible-builds/attachments/20150213/64ef92db/attachment.sig>