Maria Valentina Marin: > On 07/21/2015 01:06 PM, Ximin Luo wrote: > > Sorry in advance if this sounds like nitpicking - I notice that a lot of > > these patches use BUILD_DATE instead of SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH. Any reason for > > the difference? > > I used this fix because it was specified in the description here > https://reproducible.debian.net/issues/unstable/not_using_dh_builddeb_issue.html > > > > but could future patches use the latter? > > I can use SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH for future patches, and also modify the > issue description. > > Will this be okay for everybody?
I think manually defining BUILD_DATE like we've done so far or sourcing a `.mk` is pretty equivalent for these cases. -- Lunar .''`. lu...@debian.org : :Ⓐ : # apt-get install anarchism `. `'` `-
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducibleemail@example.com http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds