Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 13:43:57 -0400 From: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> Cc: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Enabling the WITH_REPRODUCIBLE_BUILD knob for 12.0-REL Message-ID: <CAPyFy2A44TdURhQM7hqXxyuUBPRK8NmdybAxj5KSSHJ9rFFNMg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201809101651.w8AGpBDl078811@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> References: <CAPyFy2C6=trSndoNmNn8SZv1Taq9n%2BtUqj3wY04DCqJ%2B-OuF5Q@mail.gmail.com> <201809101651.w8AGpBDl078811@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10 September 2018 at 12:51, Rodney W. Grimes <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > > Why not just turn this on and leave it on? I know a number of developers want to keep the metadata for their own builds at least. We have essentially three different levels of metadata that are arguably sensible: 1. Major/minor version, release/branch name, architecture 2. Version control information 3. Path, user, date, time, host And three kinds of working trees: 1. Non-versioned with/without modifications (e.g., a src tarball) 2. git/svn/other checkout, without modifications 3. git/svn/other checkout, with modifications What I'm proposing for 12.0 gives us 1+2 always (regardless of the state of the tree). I think there's more discussion to be had on the mapping between the tree type/state and amount of metadata to include. If we come to a consensus I'll handle it, but don't want to hold up a change destined for 12.0 with a broader discussion.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPyFy2A44TdURhQM7hqXxyuUBPRK8NmdybAxj5KSSHJ9rFFNMg>