On lunes, 13 de noviembre de 2017 19:15:44 -03 Pino Toscano wrote: [snip] > What I see it is happening here is: you (= people working on > reproducible builds) see __FILE__, and the problems that arise from its > abuse; to overcome this issue, you use the sledgehammer solution, > basically changing what __FILE__ means, and thus breaking even valid > use cases. Sorry, but I do not see how this is useful. > > A better approach here is to work on removing the invalid & abusing > usages of __FILE__ from packages, just like it was done for __DATE__. I can't but agree with Pino here. Moreover I consider this a gcc patch: it breaks a well defined macro. Please reassign as appropiate (or I'll do it later on). -- Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.