Hello, Vagrant Cascadian <vagr...@debian.org> writes:
> On 2018-10-12, Björn Höfling wrote: >> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 19:35:51 +0200 >> Gábor Boskovits <boskov...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Gábor Boskovits <boskov...@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2018. okt. >>> 12., P, 19:00): >>> > I've tracked down the javadoc timestamp problem. >>> > There is a command line flag for javadoc (notimestamp), that >>> > disables generating the comment in the docs that contains the >>> > timestamp. Currently I see two ways forward: >>> > 1. Track down the calls to javadoc, and add the flag to all calls. >>> > 2. Write a simple patch to make javadoc behave as if notimestamp was >>> > specified, whenever >>> > SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is defined. >>> > I do not think, that the patch produced by 2 is upstreamable, but it >>> > seems much less work. WDYT? >>> >>> Also we can simply turn off the timestamp generation >>> unconditionally... >> >> Number 2 sounds good, and why not giving it a try to place it upstream? > > There's been some discussion about this in Debian and in reproducible > builds: > > https://bugs.debian.org/783938 > > > https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/TimestampsInDocumentationGeneratedByJavadoc > > > https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/issues/unstable/timestamps_in_documentation_generated_by_javadoc_issue.html > In the above, 2 solutions are mentioned: 1. Strip timestamp in files generated by javadoc 2. Patch javadoc to honor SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH It seems 2 is easier but 1 is also possible since we have 'xml->sxml' and friends in guile. > Hope it's useful! > > > live well, > vagrant
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
