On 12/22/20, Deri <d...@chuzzlewit.myzen.co.uk> wrote: > Isn't the actual build output of groff marks on the page, and it is > this we should be comparing to detect changes between one version and > another, not the source code produced by groff which needs to run in > order to produce the marks. I'm sure if the postscript or pdf is rastered > to a binary bitmap and new and old are subtracted from each other, > if there are any black pixels left in the image then it has failed the > reproducibility test. If the result is a completely white page there has > been no difference between the two builds, even if the post processor > has had changes which are intended to improve the file it produces, > but those changes have not altered the result of "running" that file.
Has anyone developed a script or pipeline for doing this? I'm not even sure what tools one would use to accomplish these steps. A little internet digging would answer that, but if someone already does this and has a toolchain at hand they'd be willing to share, I'd be happy to avoid duplicating that effort.
