at SF is also that I'm going to move
code repos. Too much going on atm.
--
Florian Höch
https://displaycal.net
Am 29.08.2016 um 15:38 schrieb Christian Marillat:
> OK, I've removed this patch. No new upload, I'm waiting for the next
> upstream release.
I see now what the problem is. I was using time.mktime() to convert the
static timestamp to seconds since epoch for insertion into the appdata
XML file,
Am 29.08.2016 um 14:56 schrieb Christian Marillat:
> You are really sure ?
All the patch seems to do in essence is use a different static timestamp
value, which for all intents and purposes is fine, it just looks redundant.
I'm a bit befuddled by this:
Since DisplayCAL 3.1.5, the 'lastmod_time' variable is populated from
the value recorded statically in the file DisplayCAL/__version__.py that
is part of the source archive, so the build is (and was) reproducible
already [1], and the patch was unneeded. I see that the
Upstream here, not sure what this bug report is about, sources are
available below and match what's included in the tarball (except the
comment at the top, not sure if that's a problem):
https://github.com/fhoech/PrismJS-FYD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
Can someone retest this with current Python (2.7.3-2) and libc6
(2.13-35) from testing please? I can't reproduce the issue at all.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
6 matches
Mail list logo
