Ximin, Dhole:

Thanks for correct my misconception about the state of the issue and the
discouragement of the patch sent by Dhole.

Thanks to Dhole too for update the wiki page of the issue.


> On 16-02-11 20:13:25, Ximin Luo wrote:
> > Juan Picca:
> > > From the issue page
> > > (https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/TimestampsFromCPPMacros)
> > > i see that the usage of SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH was
> > > discouraged in the gcc-patches mailing list thread.
> > >
> >
> > Hi Juan, I think that was not discouragement, it was just neutral
discussion about the consequences.
> >
> > As I understand the patch is going ahead and will eventually hit GCC 6.
They just needed to find some time that's suitable for their release cycle.
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg01590.html
> >
> > X
> Exactly!  As Ximin says, the thread you included was from june 2015.
> The message you show was not really a discouragement but a suggestion,
> so it must be taken as any other suggestion, and I believe that the
> message was not from a gcc maintainer.
> The thread that Ximin included is the most recent discussion, see the
> beginning here:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg01890.html.
> Basically I took the original patch and modified following the
> suggestions from the gcc contributors in the original thread plus review
> by the Debian gcc maintainer Matthias Klose <doko at debian dot org>
> (you can follow the thread to learn more).  Eventually the gcc people
> seemed to have no further complain about the patch; I even signed the
> copyright assignment.  So the last message was that they are now at the
> stage of fixing bugs in GCC 5, and they asked me to send the patch again
> when the new feature stage for GCC 6 starts, which should be around
> April 2016 :)
> --
> Dhole
Reproducible-builds mailing list

Reply via email to