On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 06:46:35AM +0200, Mechtilde Stehmann wrote:
> > I'll note that fakeroot was probably broken on armel, armhf since
> > the t64 migration until mid-August.
> > Is fakeroot involved in any way? If so, it might make sense to
> > discard any results from that period.
> Thanks for
Hello Chris,
Am 26.08.24 um 00:05 schrieb Chris Hofstaedtler:
[..]
Dates are 2022-06-08 as expected and not 1970-01-03 as described
at tests.rb.o.
[..]
https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/history/armhf/vinnie.html
I briefly looked at vinnie. Given it is arch:all, I kinda expect
[..]
> Dates are 2022-06-08 as expected and not 1970-01-03 as described
> at tests.rb.o.
[..]
> > https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/history/armhf/vinnie.html
I briefly looked at vinnie. Given it is arch:all, I kinda expect it
to produce the "same" deb regardless of the arch it is buil
Hello Vagrant,
in the meantime I did a build at amdahl.debian.org and can't reproduce
the problem too.
i did it with this package
https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/armhf/csvjdbc.html
Dates are 2022-06-08 as expected and not 1970-01-03 as described at
tests.rb.o.
Hello,
in the meantime I did some more tests to find the reason for it.
I build it again with pbuilder specifying ARCH=armhf and get the right
date for the pom file (same date as the amd64 build)
Now I think I need access to an armhf box to test it natively.
What should I do to get temporary
On 2024-05-20, Mechtilde Stehmann wrote:
> I want to clean up my Java packages.
>
> There are several with FTBR. I found that the day of the *.poms s a date
> from 1970.
>
> for example they are the packages
>
> vinnie
Looking at the history for vinnie:
https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/de
6 matches
Mail list logo
