On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:11:25 +0200 Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> It means that the point 3 (usage of __DATE__ and __TIME__) is the only
> one left to address in the version currently in experimental.
>
Hi, GCC have now added support for SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH so we can use this
Ximin Luo:
> Aurelien Jarno:
>> On 2016-06-06 02:48, Ximin Luo wrote:
>>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:11:25 +0200 Aurelien Jarno <aurel...@aurel32.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>> It means that the point 3 (usage of __DATE__ and __TIME__) is the only
>
X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-bui...@lists.alioth.debian.org
+CC Mike Frysinger
Aurelien Jarno:
> On 2016-06-06 02:48, Ximin Luo wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:11:25 +0200 Aurelien Jarno <aurel...@aurel32.net>
>> wrote:
>>> It means that the point 3 (usage of __DA
in all cases and the test returns 2.
.
Normally, such systems can still resolve "localhost." via nsswitch/getent and
getaddrinfo is not suppose to attempt resolution of "localhost." anyways.
Author: Ximin Luo <infini...@debian.org>
Bug: TBD
---
This patch header follows DE
Aurelien Jarno:
> On 2016-11-15 16:00, Ximin Luo wrote:
>> Package: glibc
>> Version: 2.24-5
>> Severity: important
>> Tags: upstream patch
>> Forwarded: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20826
>>
>> Dear Maintainer,
>>
&
Aurelien Jarno:
> On 2016-11-16 09:48, Ximin Luo wrote:
>> Aurelien Jarno:
>>> On 2016-11-15 16:00, Ximin Luo wrote:
>>>> Package: glibc
>>>> Version: 2.24-5
>>>> Severity: important
>>>> Tags: upstream patch
>>>> F
Mike Frysinger:
> On 28 Jul 2016 15:15, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> On 03/09/2016 05:30 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> would it be so terrible to properly marshall this data ?
>>
>> Ximin Luo and I discussed this and I wonder if it is possible to read
>> out the
Ximin Luo:
> Mike Frysinger:
>> On 28 Jul 2016 15:15, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> On 03/09/2016 05:30 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>>> would it be so terrible to properly marshall this data ?
>>>
>>> Ximin Luo and I discussed this and I wonder if it is
Package: glibc
Version: 2.24-7
Severity: serious
Tags: patch
Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past)
Dear Maintainer,
whilst trying to build glibc:
/usr/bin/install -c -m 644
/tmp/debrepro.uGH5xEsmL1/build/source/build-tree/amd64-libc/gnu/lib-names-64.h
- the upstream folks
Aurelien Jarno:
> On 2016-06-06 02:48, Ximin Luo wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:11:25 +0200 Aurelien Jarno <aurel...@aurel32.net>
>> wrote:
>>> It means that the point 3 (usage of __DATE__ and __TIME__) is the only
>>> one l
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+glibc (2.24-7.1) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload.
+ * Try for reproducibility.
+
+ -- Ximin Luo <infinity0@profitbricks-build17-amd64> Tue, 15 Nov 2016 18:03:37 +
+
glibc (2.24-7) unstable; urgency=medium
[ Samuel Thibault ]
diff -Nru glib
Aurelien Jarno:
> [..]
>
> It would be nice to have an explanation why the changes from your patch
> are needed. See my comments below.
>
>
>> diff -Nru glibc-2.24/debian/rules glibc-2.24/debian/rules
>> --- glibc-2.24/debian/rules 2016-11-25 21:59:04.0 +
>> +++
12 matches
Mail list logo