On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 14:37:30 +0000 James Addison <j...@jp-hosting.net> wrote:
>Followup-For: Bug #1064648 >X-Debbugs-Cc: gus...@debian.org > >Hi Andreas - thanks for investigating! > >> https://github.com/gusnan/allegro5/commit/e4369e13b1edb96b8ae4821c5363ac7b61002d3e >> > >Looks good - I noticed you fixed the typo already :) > >> https://github.com/gusnan/allegro5/commit/842af9e5d6cd9c8fd0d0d2f8095f872e7bd77cef >> > >Yep, also looks good to me. > >> Nah, my mistake, that didn't seem to fix the reproducibility - The >> SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH stuff seems to work, but the other one needs more >> work. > >Huh, strange - what differences do you find? Two doc packages that I built a >few moments ago using reprotest here are identical -- although I did have time >variance disabled during that test. > Oh, it's quite likely that my test case is flawed and it does already work - maybe we should just upload it and see what the reproducibility tests say then, and handle any problems that come up then. But, this will have to wait a while - Allegro5 is involved in the time_t transition which has asked to avoid uploads during the transition. (We'll have to wait a few days if I'm not mistaken). best /Andreas gus...@debian.org
