On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 11:15:26PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 12:05:17AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 03:20:54PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 05:05:36PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > a.) go to
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 11:15:26PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 12:05:17AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 03:20:54PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 05:05:36PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > a.) go to
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 12:05:17AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 03:20:54PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 05:05:36PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > a.) go to http://reproducible.debian.net/$srcpkg and see if its
> > reproducible today.
> As I
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 03:20:54PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 05:05:36PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> a.) go to http://reproducible.debian.net/$srcpkg and see if its reproducible
> today.
As I said, I would like to check that my package build is reproducible before
I
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 09:58:12PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Sun, 2017-05-14 at 15:20:54 +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > Bill, did you do this for your packages?
on re-reading what I wrote here, it occurred to me that this could be
read *hostile* despite me having *zero* intentions to
On Sun, 2017-05-14 at 15:20:54 +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 05:05:36PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > OK, but how can I check that my package build is reproducible before
> > uploading
> > it ?
>
> in general you cannot find out with 100% certainity whether a given
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 05:05:36PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> OK, but how can I check that my package build is reproducible before uploading
> it ?
in general you cannot find out with 100% certainity whether a given source
package
will be reproducible. You can only find out with certainity
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 02:58:27PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 04:51:47PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > the official tool to build packages reproducible in sid is called
> > > "dpkg-buildpackage" (since dpkg 1.18.16 in sid since 2016-12-17).
> > So if your package
On Sun, May 07, 2017 at 06:15:38PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > unsurprisingly I'm also in favor of making this policy change, now.
> Actually, yes, why were we waiting for stretch to be released? :)
good question. I guess because of a mental barrier against doing changes
targeted post-stretch
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 04:51:47PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > the official tool to build packages reproducible in sid is called
> > "dpkg-buildpackage" (since dpkg 1.18.16 in sid since 2016-12-17).
> So if your package builds with "dpkg-buildpackage" then the build is
> reproducible and any
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 02:36:46PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 02:42:43PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > I really think there should be an official tool to do build packages
> > reproducibly with an interface like cowbuilder.
>
> the official tool to build packages
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 02:42:43PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> I really think there should be an official tool to do build packages
> reproducibly with an interface like cowbuilder.
the official tool to build packages reproducible in sid is called
"dpkg-buildpackage" (since dpkg 1.18.16 in
On Sun, May 07, 2017 at 03:35:00PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> hi,
>
> unsurprisingly I'm also in favor of making this policy change, now.
>
> I also believe there is quite a consensus (definitly a rough one…) in Debian
> for making this change, judging by the feedback we got at 3 DebConfs
Hi Holger,
> unsurprisingly I'm also in favor of making this policy change, now.
Actually, yes, why were we waiting for stretch to be released? :)
> Last and least for now: the wording of
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?att=1;bug=844431;filename=debian-policy.diff.txt;msg=17
>
hi,
unsurprisingly I'm also in favor of making this policy change, now.
I also believe there is quite a consensus (definitly a rough one…) in Debian
for making this change, judging by the feedback we got at 3 DebConfs since 2013,
several mini Debconfs and other events, plus the general feedback
15 matches
Mail list logo
