From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jul 20 05:18:51 2021 Received: (at 49517) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jul 2021 09:18:51 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32802 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5ltr-00024B-9M for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 05:18:51 -0400 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:50195) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5lto-00023x-Tj for 49517@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 05:18:50 -0400 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0139240026 for <49517@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 11:18:42 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1626772722; bh=CYgVQdRJ8rKGzOhEwfnUxN561woonwGgViYMEHdTngM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=U62BGuxGgPGmsKDoij9pi9Uyzi4yNIQ1mk8cYHlht1+77bZSTJOqZj8/VLmUiIrit mB8Cp0FoYeGVYd99N5cc+8SNpB/N/9NadQ4XSW7IAB60xp7KVGF9tx2TNCh1X5o8+K zXWL9XCpDvjyrEyj4BJtL3MphN8sFWDq6obAS6qg3+clt7s4HCgMfx9NO7DnWobCis 5kMKbbL0th1+ASb8cOs2+xWtkigvX+cdOWpZI8rOb3QTxcEmVBYOvRHRXpFHJesrR6 02k6P4Wj+I6909DG+y3v4tzF8xJD6RHyEynTRUsH5WXxkYH6mWi5OwNUGRmQTMXpji B1gbez9A+Ph5g== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4GTY6n6Qx6z6tmT; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 11:18:41 +0200 (CEST) References: <87o8b1p8k1.fsf@kitej> <3ae1061ea0a61b579c48f9ea7b4f4832@mail.kylheku.com> <96d55c0d8940c64eca79aa4a15a3cb8f@mail.kylheku.com> <874kcr7vt7.fsf@kitej> <598802eda2050f063d01d802edfead99@mail.kylheku.com> <87bl6ycxqk.fsf@kitej> From: Guillaume Le Vaillant To: Kaz Kylheku Subject: Re: [bug#49517] [PATCH] gnu: txr: Build documentation and update to 265. In-reply-to: Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 09:18:39 +0000 Message-ID: <87bl6xbaxc.fsf@kitej> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 49517 Cc: "Paul A. Patience" , 49517@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Kaz Kylheku skribis: > On 2021-07-19 05:08, Guillaume Le Vaillant wrote: >> So Debian indeed has a patch adding the possibility to set the timestamp >> based on SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH (see '2010_add_build_timestamp_setting.patch' >> in [1] for example). > > Looks like they rolled out this patch into production in 2015. > > Is there a reason why Guix can't just steal the Debian patches > related to reproducibility? (Like underlying differences it the overall > approach which lead to incompatibilities?) I don't think so, the developer who made the patch for Guix probably just didn't know about Debian's patch. > It would probably be best if distros did this the same way, so > there are no surprises. > > GNU/Linux could set a precedent for other platforms, even. > If I'm building something on, say, Cygwin, OpenBSD or MacOS, if the > reproducbility stuff works the same way like on GNU/Linuxes, that's > great. > > Here is a powerful argument why Just One Way of doing it is better: > > Distros should not be carrying patches for this in the first place; > the programs themselves should be upstreaming the changes for > reproducibility. > > If there is an agreed-upon /de facto/ (or /de jure/) standard way > of doing it, it is easier to persuade the individual program developers to > accept the changes. They have a single target to hit which covers > all platforms. > > In contrast, if reproducibility is an /ad hoc/ OS-and-distro-specific > matter, they are going to be understandably less motivated to upstream > the changes. > > Nobody wants a situation in their source tree like: > > patches/for-debian > /for-guix > /for-solaris > ... > > Just one implementation, committed into trunk, with with no #ifdefs. In this case upstream explicitly refused merging the patches for reproducibility (https://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=698208). --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iIUEAREKAC0WIQTLxZxm7Ce5cXlAaz5r6CCK3yH+PwUCYPaU7w8cZ2x2QHBvc3Rl by5uZXQACgkQa+ggit8h/j9xhwD+Ia5eHbFp9G97U1ZsEGujIPq3XsPnaTc3h47X ndQxyzMA/272U7AXqHIwjcv0J5oQFXOT3Lasorv5WCMR5EvUHAO6 =O8Q9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--