On 20 March 2017 at 23:34, Thomas Kluyver wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017, at 01:02 PM, Robin Becker wrote:
> > I guess the algorithm variation across pythons would make dictionary
> order quite variable.
>
> For a Python based tool, I think it's reasonable that reproducing a
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017, at 01:02 PM, Robin Becker wrote:
> Well now I am confused. The date / times mentioned in the debian patch
> are those
> we force into the documents produced by the reportlab package when it is
> used.
>
> They would not normally be part of the package itself. Although the
>
On 20/03/2017 11:35, Thomas Kluyver wrote:
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017, at 09:00 AM, Robin Becker wrote:
Obviously if I have the ability to embed repr(some_object)
into the document output then it will vary (unless the underlying python
is reproducible). I'm not sure if debian runs the whole
As Thomas mentioned PYTHONHASHSEED is sufficient to solve non-determinism
by the hashing. In my experience this hashing, along with datetimes (e.g.
in the bytecode) are typically the only causes of non-determinism in Python
packages.
Someone from I think Debian did mention [1] that they cannot
On 18/03/2017 07:20, Nick Coghlan wrote:
...
While the reproducible builds effort started in Debian and is furthest
advanced there, it's not distro specific - interested developers working on
other distros were already looking into it, and the Core Infrastructure
Initiative has backed
On 17/03/2017 17:49, David Wilson wrote:
Hey Robin,
What happens if other distros decide not to use this environment variable?
Do I really want distro specific code in the package?
AFAIK this is seeing a great deal of use outside of Debian and even
Linux, for instance GCC also supports this