[Reproducible-builds] GSoC 2015 Week 8: Move forward reproducible builds

[Jérémy Bobbio]

Maria Valentina Marin:
> On 07/21/2015 01:06 PM, Ximin Luo wrote:
> > Sorry in advance if this sounds like nitpicking - I notice that a lot of these patches use BUILD_DATE instead of SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH. Any reason for the difference? 
> 
> I used this fix because it was specified in the description here
> https://reproducible.debian.net/issues/unstable/not_using_dh_builddeb_issue.html
> 
> 
> > but could future patches use the latter? 
> 
> I can use SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH for future patches, and also modify the
> issue description.
> 
> Will this be okay for everybody?

I think manually defining BUILD_DATE like we've done so far or sourcing
a `.mk` is pretty equivalent for these cases.

-- 
Lunar                                .''`. 
lunar at debian.org                    : :Ⓐ  :  # apt-get install anarchism
                                    `. `'` 
                                      `-   
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/reproducible-builds/attachments/20150721/923885b1/attachment.sig>