misleading timestamps in binnmus

[Ian Jackson]

(CCing reproducible-builds again:)

Sven Joachim writes ("Re: misleading timestamps in binnmus"):
> I'm afraid I don't really have a good suggestion.  Using current date
> would work but obviously break reproducibility, and any other date seems
> arbitrary.

I don't understand why using the current date would break
reproducibility.

How does one reproduce a binnmu ?

Clearly one needs a copy of the binnmu changelog stanza, because that
(a) determines the version numbers of the generated .debs and (b) is
actually included in the generated .debs.

There is no updated .dsc in the archive, but the .deb one is trying to
reproduce contains the very changelog fragment in question.  So the
procedure has to be to combine the archive's .dsc with the .deb's
binnmu changelog stanza into a new source package.

This ought to be be reproducible regardless of what date is in the
.deb's binnmu changelog stanza.  So I think the .deb's binnmu
changelog stanza can be the date of the build (or the date of the
binnmu request, or whatever is convenient).

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson at chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.