[Reproducible-builds] GCC patch reviewed. Proposed mail for gcc-patches mailing list

[Santiago Vila]

B1;2802;0cOn Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:41:51AM +0000, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> 
> > So, I don't think that this patch would really be "beneficial to our
> > project", as it will only serve to artificially "improve" the statistics.
> 
> Out of interest, would you extend this argument to argue for an
> arbitrary build path?

In principle, yes. I have yet to see why an executable should be
different just because it was built in one path or in another one.