guix-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[bug#70169] [PATCH v2 04/12] maint: Help help2man generate reproducible


From: pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
Subject: [bug#70169] [PATCH v2 04/12] maint: Help help2man generate reproducible man-pages.
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2024 15:54:13 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)

Hello Jan,

Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> writes:
> diff --git a/doc/local.mk b/doc/local.mk
> index 5f014b9c3d..017686137a 100644
> --- a/doc/local.mk
> +++ b/doc/local.mk
> @@ -224,6 +224,9 @@ gen_man =                                         \
>    $(HELP2MANFLAGS)
>  
>  HELP2MANFLAGS = --source=GNU --info-page=$(PACKAGE_TARNAME)
> +# help2man reproducibility
> +SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH = $(shell git show HEAD --format=%ct --no-patch 
> 2>/dev/null || echo 0)
> +export SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH
>  
>  $(srcdir)/%D%/guix.1: scripts/guix.in $(sub_commands_mans)
>       -$(AM_V_HELP2MAN)$(gen_man) --output="$@" `basename "$@" .1`

Do I interpret correctly that “echo 0” is a fallback timestamp?

Looking at the now gone instructions from “git show
83c60bb0622440afe98930820186ddfa1e6e8b2f”, at that time, a timestamp of
1 was used for the tarball; I do not remember why.  In
guix/scripts/pack.scm, 1 is used for squashfs and docker images.

Is 1 a better timestamp than 0?

Regards,
Florian





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]