Bug#138409: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

2016-02-04 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Donnerstag, 4. Februar 2016, Guillem Jover wrote: > I asked for more suggestions on #debian-dpkg, and Johannes Schauer > suggested Transitive-Build-Depends, which is something I had in mind > too (that or «Recursive-»), but kind of softly discarded in trying to > have a consistently

Bug#138409: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

2016-02-04 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Sun, 2016-01-31 at 14:43:08 +0100, Jérémy Bobbio wrote: > Guillem Jover: > > > How about naming the field “Environment-Variables”? > > > > Hmm, or Environment, or Build-Environment, which reminds me that I've > > found the usage of Build-Environment (as the list of transitively > >

Bug#138409: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

2016-02-04 Thread Guillem Jover
On Thu, 2016-02-04 at 09:44:13 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > (BTW I also realized that I don't think we are including «Essential:yes» > packages in that set, and we should.) Actually, disregard this, they are already included! Sorry for the noise. Thanks, Guillem

Bug#138409: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

2016-01-31 Thread Jérémy Bobbio
Guillem Jover: > Oh and had completely forgotten, could you please also add a new > deb-buildinfo(5) man page describing the format of the file? I really > want all file formats supported by dpkg to be documented here for > external parties to refer to. I think the manpage is the only remaining

Bug#138409: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

2016-01-31 Thread Jérémy Bobbio
Guillem Jover: > > How about naming the field “Environment-Variables”? > > Hmm, or Environment, or Build-Environment, which reminds me that I've > found the usage of Build-Environment (as the list of transitively > required packages) slightly confusing, precisely because the first > thing that