Re: Please review the draft for week 133's blog post
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 01:34:00PM +, Ximin Luo wrote: > This week's blog post draft is now available for review: > https://reproducible.alioth.debian.org/blog/drafts/133/ [...] > I'll wait at least 24 hours from the time of this email for any comments, and > if everything is good then I will publish it soon after that. please hold off publishing this blog for another 24h. -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
Re: Bug#876901: QFINDTESTDATA uses __FILE__
In data martedì 14 novembre 2017 13:47:56 CET, Holger Levsen ha scritto: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 07:22:07AM +0100, Pino Toscano wrote: > > > There are quite a lot of packages that use __FILE__ so forgive me for > > > not checking every single use-case of it. > > > > This. When something is used so widely, then changing its behaviour > > blindly is simply a no-no. > > I tend to agree. > > > > This will require us to patch hundreds of packages, and isn't > > > realistic. > > > > If "hundreds of packages" misuse __FILE__, then simply *fix them*. > > Sure, it will require time, energy, etc, but I do not see other ways > > around that without breaking standard behaviours. > > also agreed. > > > > Please, you try sending hundreds of patches, then I will take your > > > "solution" more seriously. > > My *solution* (without quotes) is more realistic than your blind > > breakage. > > Pino, could you be so kind and repeat your proposed solution here again, > for the sake of clarity?! It is basically what I wrote in the quoted part above (not this one, the last where you replied "also agreed". I will repeat it again, as asked: | No, the solution is: | a) *not* break what __FILE__ means | b) remove the misuses of __FILE__ in packages (not the case of | QFINDTESTDATA) As also Lisandro explained a bit more in another email, this solution takes a bit more time and effort, but it pays off (especially if this is done directly upstream) as all the improper usages will be removed, with little to no effort specific for Debian. -- Pino Toscano signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
Re: Bug#876901: QFINDTESTDATA uses __FILE__
In data martedì 14 novembre 2017 11:14:00 CET, Ximin Luo ha scritto: > You're using __FILE__ inappropriately, none of the documentation > guarantees or implies that you can access __FILE__ as a real > filesystem path. "Surely for relative paths" is your justification > for your own broken behaviour. Again, this is your own echo chamber: "__FILE__ is broken, everybody using it is broken no matter what". > You can either accept my one line patch suggestion, or fix it some > other way. I am not interested in working around broken changes introduced blindly for very doubtful reasons. > I'm not going to change the GCC patch, it does nothing wrong. Let me add also another POV to this approach: do you really expect Debian to carry this important diversion for GCC upstream? I really doubt GCC will accept this. -- Pino Toscano signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
Re: Bug#876901: QFINDTESTDATA uses __FILE__
On martes, 14 de noviembre de 2017 13:45:37 -03 Holger Levsen wrote: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:34:00AM +, Ximin Luo wrote: > > > Sorry, it is not realistic to force us to have a delta from upstream for > > > no > > > direct gain. > > > > None of the solutions I suggested involve patching upstream, they would be > > done in d/rules. > "we do not only care about Debian but free software in general" - so how > to do you propose this should be handled for non Debian, eg rpms or > plain building from source? > > A Debian only solution for this problem is pretty bad or rather, not a > real solution. Please allow me to try to analyze this situation from another perspective, much more related to what Holger wrote above. First of all, I want to emphasize that we Qt/KDE maintainers do see a real value in both reproducibilty and (because it was mentioned before) cross building efforts. For the cross part Helmut Grone and Dmitry Schanev have been doing an *amazing* work to avoid having to create multiple Qt builds to be able to cross build stuff, which would have been much easier but a worse solution for everyone. In the same vein Sune Vuorela has been creating patches *directly* to Qt upstream in order to improve reproducibility within Qt. It took time, but upstream did undertood the reasons behind them and are now part of our code. I do understand that wanting to change what __FILE__ means is an interesting approach, specially because it solves many issues at once (IIRC ~1800?). But it has some drawbacks too: - It changes the meaning of a well predefined macro (and as I say before I consider this a delta), which can have real valid usages like in our case. - It does not expands outside Debian. - It does not reinforce the idea of reproducibility to programmers. Other solutions to related issues made upstreams know and understand the issue, so everybody got a better experience. Xi: you also mentioned that having to file hundreds of patchs seems impossible. Well, it seems so, but it is actually not that necessary. Please allow me to explain the idea. What you can do here is starting by documenting/blogging about bad use cases so people have something to read when bugs arrive. Then go ahead with mass bug filing: announce it in debian-devel first, let people get involved, then file whatever amount of bugs is necessary, being sure to link the aforementioned doc of the first step. At this point many bugs will get an upstream bug, patches upstream, developers understanding the issue... and many bugs being fixed by other people. Projects will get a better source code, all distros can benefit from it an most probably eve cooperate by patching their preferred sources upstream. Drawbacks: it takes much more time. But I think the final result justifies it. You might wonder if there has been any experience on this before. At least from my POV I can say yes. Removing Qt3 in favour of Qt4 did not meant simply asking for the Qt3 sources removal but pushing people to do their best to port the code. It took us (if I remember correctly) one and a half release. Removing Qt4 is an effort currently undergoing, which has already taken at least three Debian releases. Is it worth the effort? Yes! Because we pushed many sources to be ported, thus giving projects a new lifespan, better usability, better code... So yes, it might not sound pretty, but the long road, in my opinion at least, is the way to go here. Even if it means filing 1800 bugs. -- Una vez que hemos eliminado lo imposible, lo que queda, por improbable que parezca, es la verdad. Sherlock Holmes Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
Re: Bug#876901: QFINDTESTDATA uses __FILE__
On martes, 14 de noviembre de 2017 11:34:00 -03 Ximin Luo wrote: > Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer: > > [..] > > > > Sorry, it is not realistic to force us to have a delta from upstream for > > no > > direct gain. > > None of the solutions I suggested involve patching upstream, they would be > done in d/rules. The proposed change changes a macro. That means the resulting code is different, no matter if the change comes from a patch or debian/rules. Consider this "a patch in debian/rules". Allow me to try another way to see this issue, please see my next mail (to keep the threading better). -- Without us [Free Software developers], people would study computer science and programming without ever having seen a real program in its entirety. That's like becoming writers without ever having read a complete book. Matthias Ettrich, founder of the KDE project. http://www.efytimes.com/efytimes/25412/news.htm Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
Re: Bug#876901: QFINDTESTDATA uses __FILE__
hi, dropping the bug and the qt mailinglist from cc:... On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:14:00AM +, Ximin Luo wrote: > Whatever, I don't care about having such a pointless long discussion. [...] > You can either accept my one line patch suggestion, or fix it some other way. > I'm not going to change the GCC patch, it does nothing wrong. > > Not going to spend any more time on this. SIGH. I'm not convinced such messages will help getting the current implementation widely adopted & merged into GCC :/ We evidently *need* to spend more time on this. (or give up and go shopping because it's hard.) -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
Re: Bug#876901: QFINDTESTDATA uses __FILE__
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 07:22:07AM +0100, Pino Toscano wrote: > > There are quite a lot of packages that use __FILE__ so forgive me for > > not checking every single use-case of it. > > This. When something is used so widely, then changing its behaviour > blindly is simply a no-no. I tend to agree. > > This will require us to patch hundreds of packages, and isn't > > realistic. > > If "hundreds of packages" misuse __FILE__, then simply *fix them*. > Sure, it will require time, energy, etc, but I do not see other ways > around that without breaking standard behaviours. also agreed. > > Please, you try sending hundreds of patches, then I will take your > > "solution" more seriously. > My *solution* (without quotes) is more realistic than your blind > breakage. Pino, could you be so kind and repeat your proposed solution here again, for the sake of clarity?! -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
Re: Bug#876901: QFINDTESTDATA uses __FILE__
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:34:00AM +, Ximin Luo wrote: > > Sorry, it is not realistic to force us to have a delta from upstream for no > > direct gain. > None of the solutions I suggested involve patching upstream, they would be > done in d/rules. "we do not only care about Debian but free software in general" - so how to do you propose this should be handled for non Debian, eg rpms or plain building from source? A Debian only solution for this problem is pretty bad or rather, not a real solution. -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
Please review the draft for week 133's blog post
Hi all, This week's blog post draft is now available for review: https://reproducible.alioth.debian.org/blog/drafts/133/ Feel free to commit fixes directly to drafts/133.mdwn in https://anonscm.debian.org/git/reproducible/blog.git/ I'll wait at least 24 hours from the time of this email for any comments, and if everything is good then I will publish it soon after that. X -- GPG: ed25519/56034877E1F87C35 GPG: rsa4096/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE https://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
Re: Bug#876901: QFINDTESTDATA uses __FILE__
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer: > [..] > > Sorry, it is not realistic to force us to have a delta from upstream for no > direct gain. > None of the solutions I suggested involve patching upstream, they would be done in d/rules. X -- GPG: ed25519/56034877E1F87C35 GPG: rsa4096/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE https://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
Re: Bug#876901: QFINDTESTDATA uses __FILE__
Pino Toscano: > [..] > >> Well let's take a look at the standards: >> [...] > > Even with different wordings, both describe basically the same > behaviour. And yes, none of them says that __FILE__ is a full path, > but surely for relative paths the combination of $srcdir + __FILE__ > will give me the path to the source. > Whatever, I don't care about having such a pointless long discussion. You're using __FILE__ inappropriately, none of the documentation guarantees or implies that you can access __FILE__ as a real filesystem path. "Surely for relative paths" is your justification for your own broken behaviour. And that's just for GCC, IBM and Microsoft both use the term "name of the file" which don't even suggest any sort of path. You can either accept my one line patch suggestion, or fix it some other way. I'm not going to change the GCC patch, it does nothing wrong. Not going to spend any more time on this. X -- GPG: ed25519/56034877E1F87C35 GPG: rsa4096/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE https://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
Финансиране за предприемачи по ОП „Иновации и конкурентоспособност”
Уважаеми дами и господа, С настоящето писмо от Консултантска къща „Зарев, Георгиев и партньори” искаме да Ви информираме за актуалната възможност за финансиране на бизнес проекти „Насърчаване на предприемачеството” в рамите на оперативна програма „Иновации и конкурентоспособност”. Схема „Насърчаване на предприемачеството” предлага безвъзмездна финансова подкрепа за създаване и развитие на нови предприятия с предприемачески характер. Допустимите разходи включват трудови възнаграждения, оборудване и др. ресурсна обезпеченост. Безвъзмездното финансиране е 90% от цялостната стойност на конкретен проект и започва от 50 000 лева и достига до 390 000 лева. Към настоящето писмо прилагаме подробно резюме на програмата, което е достъпно и на нашия сайт. В него ще откриете пълна информация за допустимостта на кандидатите и други важни аспекти на схемата. Можете да свалите резюмето и в .pdf файл. Бъдете активни и финансирайте идеите си! Ще се радваме да се срещнем лично и да коментираме възможностите, които проектните инициативи позволяват. Очакваме да се свържете с нас. С уважение,Огнян БоевТелефон: 0897 926 399E-mail: b...@zandg-consultants.euwww.zandg-consultants.eu Съгласно закона за електронна търговия Чл. 6, ал. 1 Ви уведомяваме, че е възможно това да е непоискано търговско съобщение. То е еднократно изпратено писмо до Вашия e-mail адрес, който е взет от публичното пространство. Извиняваме се, ако по някаква причина сме Ви притеснили с нашето предложение. Ако не желаете да получавате съобщения от "Консултантска къща Зарев, Георгиев и партньори", моля натиснете ОТПИСВАНЕ за да се откажете да получавате нашите бюлетини! ___ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
