Source: openclonk
Version: 7.0-3
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch upstream
User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: timestamps
X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Dear Maintainer,
While working on the `reproducible builds' effort [1], we have noticed
Source: libint2
Version: 2.1.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: fails to build from source
User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: ftbfs
X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Dear Maintainer,
libint2 fails to build from source in unstable/amd64:
[..]
Source: asymptote
Version: 2.37.real-1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch upstream
User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: timestamps
X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Dear Maintainer,
While working on the `reproducible builds' effort [1], we have
Hi,
so dpkg 1.18.7 was uploaded to sid today and Mattia promply rebased
our patches on it and uploaded the following changes to our repo:
dpkg (1.18.7.0~reproducible0) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
[ Jérémy Bobbio ]
* Use a single timestamp for ar headers when building a .deb.
* Use the common
Hi.
Le 09/05/2016 14:26, Holger Levsen a écrit :
> ddce83d dpkg-buildpackage: Preset build timestamp to latest changelog entry
>
> Are there any other changes needed in dpkg for Reproducible builds of Debian?
Maybe it should be good to also have (to be merged with ddce83d)
if (!
Hi,
Alexis Bienvenüe wrote:
> Maybe it should be good to also have (to be merged with ddce83d)
>
> if (! exists($ENV{SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH_TEX_PRIMITIVES})) {
> $ENV{SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH_TEX_PRIMITIVES} = 1;
> }
>
> in dpkg-buildpackage (see summary and pointers in
>
On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 07:28:30PM +0200, Axel Beckert wrote:
> > if (! exists($ENV{SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH_TEX_PRIMITIVES})) {
> > $ENV{SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH_TEX_PRIMITIVES} = 1;
> It actually has reached Debian about a month ago, but just in
> Experimental:
>
Source: diffoscope
Version: 52
Seen on rb.d.n with:
- openocd/0.9.0-1 (all suites/archs)
- psychtoolbox-3/3.0.12.20160414.dfsg1-1 (unstable/armhf)
- publican/4.3.2-1 (all suites/archs)
Fri May 6 07:44:58 UTC 2016 - diffoscope 52 will be used to compare the two
builds:
Traceback (most recent
On 2016-05-04, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 11:35:07PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> I think bpi0's SSD may be in a very bad state. It's one of the oldest
>> nodes, so it's no huge surprise to see disk failures there...
Yup, disk seemed to be in a pretty bad state. It did
If you received this mail by mistake, please
http://archeologyseminar2015.com/data/unsubscribe.php?M=1158362=9b60644c4b810d98da10b69c24b09b2d=43=40
me from this list
Dear colleagues,
I am honored to invite you to attend the world conference on Movement
sponsored, in part, by the Harvard
Hi Vagrant,
On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 02:32:24PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> Reinstalled with a new SSD (which has considerably more space for
> wear-levelling).
> Ready for the jenkins setup scripts to be run on it!
cool! installation in progress, should be back building packages rather
Source: allegro4.4
Version: 2:4.4.2-5
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: locale
Hi!
While working on the “reproducible builds” effort [1], we have noticed
that allegro4.4 could not be built reproducibly [2]: the members of
12 matches
Mail list logo