Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 14 Nov 2010 21:22:53 +0100
From:      Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk>
To:        Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>
Cc:        =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ulrich_Sp=F6rlein?= <uqs@spoerlein.net>, FreeBSD Hackers <hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Deterministic builds?
Message-ID:  <0CF7C325-E7D9-4C51-8E60-9A0243D2FFFE@cederstrand.dk>
In-Reply-To: <xeia1v6q2t1h.fsf@kobe.laptop>
References:  <718D8E86-EA2E-4D07-BAFF-5D8D093FD296@cederstrand.dk> <20101011084733.GM2392@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <95F3B27C-42E6-4267-9965-AC3219310C35@cederstrand.dk> <20101021175748.GD19295@acme.spoerlein.net> <C297DE8F-0842-41C2-A930-A15AA0F3B3BB@cederstrand.dk> <20101022100134.GL19295@acme.spoerlein.net> <8B6E3E35-68AF-42ED-98CF-E2A4448DAA11@cederstrand.dk> <xeia1v6q2t1h.fsf@kobe.laptop>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--Apple-Mail-2088-73844678
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii


Den 12/11/2010 kl. 21.20 skrev Giorgos Keramidas:

>>=20
>> Since the SVN rev. is recorded, I think a timestamp is redundant. Any
>> ideas where I can disable the timestamps in the source?
>=20
> The timestamp is not 'redundant'.  It records _when_ you compiled the
> sources of the kernel, which in itself is a useful bit of information.

I'm curious as to why this might be useful? Would the mtime of the file =
not be be sufficient? I can only think of debugging purposes, but apart =
from the timestamp, two kernels with the same rev. would be bitwise =
identical, so I think the rev. number is more useful. Is the timestamp =
not just a remnant from the CVS days?

If it is useful, why not brand all binaries with a rev. number and a =
timestamp?

Erik=

--Apple-Mail-2088-73844678--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0CF7C325-E7D9-4C51-8E60-9A0243D2FFFE>