On 10 March 2017 at 18:51, Steven Newbury <st...@snewbury.org.uk> wrote: > On Fri, 2017-03-10 at 13:27 +0000, bugzilla-dae...@freedesktop.org > wrote: >> Comment # 23 on bug 100073 from Grazvydas Ignotas >> (In reply to oiaohm from comment #21) >> > This is why I am so upset. As soon as this comes though I have >> possible >> > trouble with miss matched mesa versions crossing with each other in >> a cache >> > directory and being hard to debug. >> That will only happen if you force the same modify timestamp on >> several >> variations of mesa that are built for matching pointer size. Do you >> really >> think it's likely to happen in practice? > > I believe that's exactly what happens with reproducible builds: > https://reproducible-builds.org/ > Take another look - there's nothing which mentions or suggests that the binaries must have the same timestamps. The rule of the game is to produce identical binaries, which is true even when we had the timestamp file.
And if you're in doubt, do try it on your end - the instructions and package(s) will help you double-check ;-) -Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
