Bug#783478: texi2html: [PATCH] Please make the build reproducible
You are right, Johannes.
I changed the flag name without notice it.
With the change done by Maria (#783475) now we can remove the
--build-date flag (i hope)
Also, now the reproducible build fails due the date in copied files,
(dist_images_DATA in Makefile.am, etc).
Please, give me some days to figure it and fix it.
Greetings,
JMPC
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:41 AM, Johannes Schauer <josch@debian.org> wrote:
> Hi Juan,
>
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 08:09:03 -0300 Juan Picca <jumapico@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The attached patch removes extra timestamps from the build system and
>> ensure a stable file order when creating the source archive. Once
>> applied, texi2html can be built reproducibly in our current experimental
>> framework.
>
> thanks for your patch!
>
> I'm considering to NMU this package together with this patch of yours but am
> having some questions about your patch before.
>
> 1. In your patch you remove ./mdate-sh and ./doc/mdate-sh. This removal makes
> your patch quite big. Why do those files have to be removed and cannot stay
> to minimize the size of the patch?
>
> 2. you call texi2html.pl with --use-date but in #783475 you renamed the
> command line option to --build-date
>
> 3. the updated patch in #783475 allows texi2html to use $SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH. So
> maybe instead of patching upstreams ./doc/Makefile.am and
> ./doc/Makefile.in, you should instead not patch these files but just export
> $SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH in debian/rules
>
> 4. in doc/Makefile.in you are moving the line calling mdate-sh around. Why?
>
> 5. you are patching ./configure.ac in addition to ./configure. But either
> ./configure does get regenerated from ./configure.ac (and in this case you
> do not need to patch ./configure) or ./configure does not get regenerated
> from ./configure.ac (and in this case you do not need to patch
> ./configure.ac). I'd prefer if configure was regenerated at build time.
>
> Thanks again for your contribution!
>
> cheers, josch
Reply to: