On 2025-09-02, Andreas Tille wrote: > I had a look into gfxboot and did a QA upload of the latest upstream > version since I realised the PR you referenced inside the bug log was > accepted. It seems your other PR regarding reproducibly[1] was not yet > accepted. I also realised your patches do not apply against the last > release (4.5.103) and so I did not incorporated these into the quilt > patches. > > I admit I'm a bit clueless what to do next so I'm simply tagging the bug > help. I realised you did some previous QA uploads so I guess you would > have uploaded if you would have considered the problem solved. Maybe they were fixed some other way? We'll see when the reproducible builds checks are run... :) Although, I seem to recall it was never a reliable non-determinism, so even a few Reproducible Builds checks might not prove the issue is fixed :/ > Please note that when upgrading I have moved the package to the Debian > team on Salsa. I was told this works nicely with a dgit based workflow > as well. My motivation was simply to possibly attract more people > who can easily access the Debian team and might profit from Salsa CI. Yeah, salsa probably makes more sense than dgit, as more people are actively using it. Thanks for checking in. I am not terribly attached to gfxboot, per se, really just wanted to make the Reproducible Builds numbers go up! UP! :) live well, vagrant
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature