Your message dated Tue, 01 Jan 2019 14:42:48 +0000 with message-id <1546353768.1333229.1622832912.41f92...@webmail.messagingengine.com> and subject line Re: Bug#825222: lintian: please allow debian/source/timestamps in unknown-file-in-debian-source has caused the Debian Bug report #825222, regarding lintian: please allow debian/source/timestamps in unknown-file-in-debian-source to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected] immediately.) -- 825222: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=825222 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: lintian Version: 2.5.44 Severity: normal -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 In the Free Pascal stack, it is common to have .ppu files. Consider them sort of binary header files. Unfortunately, these files contain the timestamp of the source file. This is undesirable because when these files are patched, the timestamp of the build is stored in those ppu files and so: 1) the build becomes unreproducible¹ 2) reverse dependent packages think the source was updated and will require a rebuild of the source To circumvent this I am adding a helper function to the fpc package (see discussions on the pascal-devel list²) to store timestamps in the debian packaging and use those to force the timestamps to something resonable. I intent to store those timestamps in debian/source/timestamps. I think that is a resonable place, so please don't error out on it in unknown-file-in-debian-source. Thanks for lintian. Paul ¹ https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/TimestampsInPPUGeneratedByFPC ² http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-pascal-devel/Week-of-Mon-20160516/001234.html - -- System Information: Debian Release: 8.4 APT prefers stable-updates APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable'), (60, 'unstable'), (50, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXRKW+AAoJEJxcmesFvXUK2loH/Rue6UlBKxIkBOuPdiDLj03o tx0p3cl/oJuurRH9KWyO3gP1zDfkufwQP96vAPYUutCkczypOo4qoSxnyuBwAJzL qM/qhFEwj68SVvq9PdAe4IBEy8U1/XCeZ+qkAgDWwYVMO6Hm9jF3DFMpKbi92zm3 leOqyyhXsY/8R2vA6GvAQnqodLceZw6NI3h4wEd4LAC8wlErVBlcNEx0VEActFc6 pzyrRW2rh1UX2G9FpDQhAxgoV2qnr3hLdUGlGOKMOB12imMzUrIV7if7n4NUsIPr q/Ks9mJTkd3cs1QjNCwU/RDEmTa0nUlnefOcrlXng8Hq8AaQLwXFnccWFhax5/Q= =PFO1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---Chris Lamb wrote: > tags 825222 + wontfix > thanks > > Hi Paul, > > > Because there are already so many files in debian/ and I liked the idea > > because it manipulates the source (like a patch). > > Whilst I understand what you mean, I'm not completely convinced :) I mean, > almost everything under debian/ "manipulates the source" and, again, > the "source" subdirectory is — at least to me — de facto reserved for the > source format in a dpkg sense. > > I'm thus marking this at wontfix […] (I'm actually going to go ahead and close this.) Regards, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` [email protected] / chris-lamb.co.uk `-
--- End Message ---
