Ok, i finally say something. g.branden.robin...@gmail.com (G. Branden Robinson) wrote: |commit da6ac443f21ef09d90b40d2e8215955c916f396a |Author: G. Branden Robinson <g.branden.robin...@gmail.com> |Date: Sun Nov 19 22:19:52 2017 -0500 | | contrib/hdtbl/examples/*.roff: Seed RNG. | | Support reproducible builds by seeding hdtbl's random number generator | (in contrib/hdtbl/examples/common.roff). | | When A/Bing roff documents after a build to see what I broke with my | changes, I always have to ignore the numerous color changes caused by | contrib/hdtbl/examples/common.roff seeding its random number generator | with the current date/time and process ID. | | Zeroes turned out to be bad seeds; the tables didn't have much in the | way of color gradients. | | Fix issue https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?52462. | | Signed-off-by: G. Branden Robinson <g.branden.robin...@gmail.com>
Yeah and i really will not look deeply into these commits no more. As a self-nominated Debian project leader i find it disturbing that you wanna honour reproducible-builds.org but then (1) do not look out for $SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH that is (rather read: unfortunately!) _the_ precondition to signal reproducibility! (2) change an aspect of a macro package that looks quite deliberate to me. If i where you, i would remove those changes and instead look for SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH in the random generator itself. (3) That is likely what i will do shall i ever reach that point. Regardless. Really. I am writing this because your last commit introduced a bug in troff source code, where an else clause now logically belongs to a different if than it should, if i recall correctly. The change itself is something good i would say, i had it TODO-commented myself, too. Sorry for the noise. --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt)