Hi,
Quoting Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues (2021-12-28 09:38:51)
> since this bug has not seen maintainer action for several months now and
> because fontconfig is one of the last remaining bits that make a
> Priority:Standard chroot unreproducible, I'd like to propose to NMU
> fontconfig with
Hi,
since this bug has not seen maintainer action for several months now and
because fontconfig is one of the last remaining bits that make a
Priority:Standard chroot unreproducible, I'd like to propose to NMU fontconfig
with the attached patch.
Essentially, I took the patch by Chris Lamb and
Hello,
I would like to send another gentle ping about this.
This bug is affecting the deployment upgrade of a current reproducible iso.
Thank you very much,
--
Andrés Pavez
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 2:51 AM Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues
wrote:
>
> Dear maintainers,
>
> On Sun, 13 Sep 2020
Dear maintainers,
On Sun, 13 Sep 2020 08:13:06 - "Chris Lamb" wrote:
> Friendly ping on this?
I'd like to send another ping about this.
This bug is affecting my package mmdebstrap so I'd love to see it fixed.
Thanks!
cheers, josch
signature.asc
Description: signature
Chris Lamb wrote:
> [..]
Friendly ping on this?
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
`-
forwarded 864082
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/fontconfig/2018-October/006374.html
thanks
Chris Lamb wrote:
> On this. Indeed, I can reproduce it […]
Can also confirm that SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is available in the
postinst and to fc-cache itself;locally added some printf(3)
statements to
Hi Johannes,
> Unfortunately, fontconfig still installs unreproducibly. Try this:
>
> $ sudo SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH=1540078640 debootstrap --variant=minbase --
> include=fontconfig unstable debian-fontconfig1
> [...]
> $ sudo SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH=1540078640 debootstrap --variant=minbase --
>
On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 19:35:44 +0100 Chris Lamb wrote:
> Hi Sven,
>
> > It does:
>
> Mea culpa; I was looking at 2.13.0-1, not 2.13.1-1. Thanks!
Unfortunately, fontconfig still installs unreproducibly. Try this:
$ sudo SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH=1540078640 debootstrap --variant=minbase
Hi Sven,
> It does:
Mea culpa; I was looking at 2.13.0-1, not 2.13.1-1. Thanks!
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
`-
On 2018-09-26 19:24 +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Hi Sven,
>
>> It seems that 2.13.1-1 was that release, can you confirm that?
>
> Thanks for chiming in.
>
> Given that this version does not contain the string SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH,
It does:
,
| $ grep -n SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH **/*
|
Hi Sven,
> It seems that 2.13.1-1 was that release, can you confirm that?
Thanks for chiming in.
Given that this version does not contain the string SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH,
this was probably another release and/or this should remain open.
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
On 2018-05-18 08:42 +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> fontconfig: please make the cache files reproducible
>
> This was merged into the upstream Git repository - would it be
> possible to make another Debian release with this change? :)
It seems that 2.13.1-1 was that release, can you confirm
Dear Keith,
> > Gentle ping on this? :) Would love to see this Tails-related work
> > in Debian!
>
> I was stalling for an upstream release with this patch; it looks like
> that shouldn't be more than a month or two from now. Any particular
> reason for urgency here?
Somewhat; it's currently
Dear Keith,
> > Gentle ping on this? :) Would love to see this Tails-related work
> > in Debian!
>
> I was stalling for an upstream release with this patch; it looks like
> that shouldn't be more than a month or two from now.
Heh, it seems like fontconfig is perpetually in this state alas. ;)
Chris Lamb writes:
> Chris Lamb wrote:
>
>> This was merged into the upstream Git repository - would it be
>> possible to make another Debian release with this change? :)
>
> Gentle ping on this? :) Would love to see this Tails-related work
> in Debian!
I was stalling for an upstream release
Chris Lamb wrote:
> This was merged into the upstream Git repository - would it be
> possible to make another Debian release with this change? :)
Gentle ping on this? :) Would love to see this Tails-related work
in Debian!
Best wishes,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'`
Chris Lamb wrote:
> This was merged into the upstream Git repository - would it be
> possible to make another Debian release with this change? :)
Gentle ping on this? :)
Best wishes,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
`-
Hi,
> fontconfig: please make the cache files reproducible
This was merged into the upstream Git repository - would it be
possible to make another Debian release with this change? :)
Best wishes,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
forwarded 864082
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/fontconfig/2018-May/006271.html
thanks
This is now *really* on the upstream mailing list... :)
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/fontconfig/2018-May/006271.html
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'`
Hi Keith,
> I think it would be useful for me to understand when and where the cache
> files end up being part of a build product
The idea is that two entirely separate builds of an essentially-
vanilla Debian-based ISO end up being bit-for-bit identical.
Currently that is not occurring as, for
Chris Lamb writes:
> Hi Keith,
>
>> > +source_date_epoch = getenv("SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH");
>>
>> Could this work as a build-time value in the library instead of a
>> run-time environment variable?
>
> Unfortunately not. Imagine the situation where we are installing
> font
Hi Keith,
> > +source_date_epoch = getenv("SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH");
>
> Could this work as a build-time value in the library instead of a
> run-time environment variable?
Unfortunately not. Imagine the situation where we are installing
font packages in a chroot that will eventually end up as,
Chris Lamb writes:
> +source_date_epoch = getenv("SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH");
Could this work as a build-time value in the library instead of a
run-time environment variable?
--
-keith
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Chris Lamb wrote:
> A better patch is in-progress on the upstream mailing list, also
> attached here.
It should eventually appear here, I assume I'm stuck in a
moderation queue or similar:
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/fontconfig/2018-May/thread.html
Regards,
--
,''`.
Chris Lamb wrote:
> Patch attached.
A better patch is in-progress on the upstream mailing list, also
attached here.
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
`-
From ccc5da9ed364df1334a3ff172d89f852d199955b Mon Sep 17
Source: fontconfig
Version: 2.12.1-0.1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
User: reproducible-bui...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: timestamps
X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-b...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Hi,
Whilst working on the Reproducible Builds effort [0], we noticed that
fontconfig generates
26 matches
Mail list logo