On Thu, Oct 15, Martin Kletzander wrote:
> Oh, so if you're wondering about reproducibility, then it's a
> different thing, I understand that. And libvirt is not a good one
> with regards to reproducible builds.
libvirt is perfect. Its just that little detail which pops up ever other
day.
Olaf
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 09:59:24AM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, Martin Kletzander wrote:
On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 08:44:55AM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
>If the same source gets built twice the resulting files may differ.
I don't see the problem, these pointers are not depending on
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 09:59:24AM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, Martin Kletzander wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 08:44:55AM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
> > >If the same source gets built twice the resulting files may differ.
>
> > I don't see the problem, these pointers are not
On Wed, Oct 14, Martin Kletzander wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 08:44:55AM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
> >If the same source gets built twice the resulting files may differ.
> I don't see the problem, these pointers are not depending on each
> other. Or are you saying that it leaves your tree d
On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 08:44:55AM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
If the same source gets built twice the resulting files may differ.
One example is this:
...
[ 305s] /usr/bin/perl -w ./rpc/genprotocol.pl /usr/bin/rpcgen -c \
[ 305s]remote/remote_protocol.x ./remote/remote_protocol.c
...
[
If the same source gets built twice the resulting files may differ.
One example is this:
...
[ 305s] /usr/bin/perl -w ./rpc/genprotocol.pl /usr/bin/rpcgen -c \
[ 305s]remote/remote_protocol.x ./remote/remote_protocol.c
...
[ 577s]
/usr/src/debug/libvirt-20150929T082652.68572de/src/remo
