Debian Bug report logs - #891194
3dldf: please make the build reproducible

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>

To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Subject: 3dldf: please make the build reproducible

Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:10:33 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Source: 3dldf
Version: 2.0.3+dfsg-7
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: timestamps
X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-bugs@lists.alioth.debian.org

Hi,

Whilst working on the Reproducible Builds effort [0], we noticed
that 3dldf could not be built reproducibly as it needlessly
includes timestamps in the generated (eg.) dodec_03.mp files.

Patch attached. An alternative would be to parse SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH
[1].

 [0] https://reproducible-builds.org/
 [1] https://reproducible-builds.org/specs/source-date-epoch/


Regards,

-- 
      ,''`.
     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
     `. `'`      lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
       `-

[3dldf.diff.txt (text/plain, attachment)]

Message #10 received at 891194@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Hilmar Preuße <hille42@web.de>

To: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>

Cc: 891194@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#891194: 3dldf: please make the build reproducible

Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 19:51:35 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

forwarded 891194 https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?55605
stop

On 23.02.18 11:10, Chris Lamb wrote:

Hi Chris,

> Whilst working on the Reproducible Builds effort [0], we noticed
> that 3dldf could not be built reproducibly as it needlessly
> includes timestamps in the generated (eg.) dodec_03.mp files.
> 
> Patch attached. An alternative would be to parse SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH
>
I tend to leave these kind of decisions to upstream authors. I've
forwarded the issue to upstream, but I have only small hope, that there
will be a reaction. I've got E-Mails form LDF, but mostly he only
promised to do something.

Hilmar
-- 
sigfault
#206401 http://counter.li.org

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #17 received at 891194@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Hilmar Preuße <hille42@web.de>

To: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>

Cc: 891194@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#891194: 3dldf: please make the build reproducible

Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 21:12:53 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Am 23.02.2018 um 11:10 teilte Chris Lamb mit:

Hi Chris,

> Whilst working on the Reproducible Builds effort [0], we noticed
> that 3dldf could not be built reproducibly as it needlessly
> includes timestamps in the generated (eg.) dodec_03.mp files.
> 
> Patch attached. An alternative would be to parse SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH
> [1].
> 
The provided patch disables time stamping in general. I don't think this
is a good idea, as users might complain about changed program behavior.
Could you extend the patch so the program obeys the SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH
variable and changes its behavior only if that variable is set?

Thanks,
  Hilmar
-- 
sigfault
#206401 http://counter.li.org

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #22 received at 891194@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Chris Lamb" <lamby@debian.org>

To: Hilmar Preuße <hille42@web.de>

Cc: 891194@bugs.debian.org, reproducible-bugs@lists.alioth.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#891194: 3dldf: please make the build reproducible

Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2019 17:18:54 +0100

[Adding reproducible-bugs@lists.alioth.debian.org to CC]

Hi Hilmar,

> The provided patch disables time stamping in general. I don't think this
> is a good idea, as users might complain about changed program behavior.

Is that likely? Genuine question. :)

> Could you extend the patch so the program obeys the SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH
> variable and changes its behavior only if that variable is set?

Yes, but is this really worth any potential "regression" when compared
to the admittedly-minor additionally code complexity you are proposing?

Note that if we do change the behaviour based on SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH we
have two options. First, we simply hide the date if this variable is
exported or secondly we do some ugly parsing and use the value of this
variable instead.

(Naturally, the former is somewhat simpler.)


Regards,

-- 
      ,''`.
     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
     `. `'`      lamby@debian.org 🍥 chris-lamb.co.uk
       `-

Message #27 received at 891194-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Debian FTP Masters <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org>

To: 891194-done@bugs.debian.org,892267-done@bugs.debian.org,897697-done@bugs.debian.org,941463-done@bugs.debian.org,

Cc: 3dldf@packages.debian.org

Subject: Bug#942048: Removed package(s) from unstable

Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 06:05:40 +0000

Version: 2.0.3+dfsg-7+rm

Dear submitter,

as the package 3dldf has just been removed from the Debian archive
unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports.  We are sorry
that we couldn't deal with your issue properly.

For details on the removal, please see https://bugs.debian.org/942048

The version of this package that was in Debian prior to this removal
can still be found using http://snapshot.debian.org/.

This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is
a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing
ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Scott Kitterman (the ftpmaster behind the curtain)

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.