On dimanche 7 août 2016 22:44:30 BST Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> On dimanche 10 juillet 2016 10:24:46 BST Reiner Herrmann wrote:
> > Hi Thomas,
> 
> Hi Reiner,
> 
> Sorry for the delay.
> 
> > On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 10:34:10PM +0100, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> > > > While working on the "reproducible builds" effort [1], we have noticed
> > > > that mrd6 could not be built reproducibly.
> > > > It embeds the build date into the binary.
> > > > 
> > > > The attached patch strips this to enable reproducible building.
> > > 
> > > Thanks for the patch! Why remove the build date in src/mrd.cpp since
> > > it's
> > > already made reproducible by using unknown instead of the date? I
> > > suspect
> > > upstream will want to keep the date for normal build and I could make
> > > the
> > > change in the Makefile to be conditional on some variable, allowing
> > > Debian
> > > build to be reproducible while keeping the build unchanged for other
> > > usage.
> > 
> > I also changed the build date to "unknown", or else the date would still
> > be part of the object file, even if it is no longer printed or used.
> > If upstream really insists on keeping the build date in (even though it
> > doesn't really provide any meaningful information), you could use the
> > __DATE__ / __TIME__ macros instead.
> 
> My question was rather opposite. I understand the unknown, I don't
> understand why does it need to be removed from the object file.
> 
> > gcc supports replacing them with reproducible dates (based on the
> > SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH environment variable).
> > If you want, I can provide an updated patch for this.
> 
> No need, I can do it myself. I'll propose a patch removing the date
> altogether and see how it is received. By the way, I've just submitted the
> following pull request upstream:
> 
> https://github.com/hugosantos/mrd6/pull/30

The pull request has been merged upstream. I want to fix the hardening info 
that lintian is throwing at me. Feel free to ping me if I haven't uploaded 
anything within one week and I'll upload what I got.

Best regards,

Thomas

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply via email to