Hi all,
I did the following:
tex.man:
added to the ENVIRONMENT section:
+.P
+Notes for Debian developers: please keep in mind, that this version of
+the \*(TX interpreter ignores the
+.B SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH
+variable. Instead the current timestamp is written into the
+.I DVI
+file. If you need a re
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 11:56:43PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
> > > tex is tex as DEK wanted it. Please use etex, which is the pdftex binary
> > > producing dvi.
>
> Well, tex the name has already a copyright that makes this necessary.
>
> > Maybe this could be documented in the
On 04.05.2018 13:38, Bill Allombert wrote:
Hi Bill,
> Maybe this could be documented in the manpage ? There is already:
>
> BUGS
>This version of TeX implements a number of optional extensions.
> In fact, many of these extensions conflict to a greater or lesser
> extent with the
> Developpers generally expect every programs that generates files with
> timestamp to honor SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH at some point.
Huuu? SDE was introduced really recently, I wouldn't say that
someone *generally* expect it to work. I (as developer) don't expect it.
It is pushed by a certain initiative
Hi Bill,
> > tex is tex as DEK wanted it. Please use etex, which is the pdftex binary
> > producing dvi.
Well, tex the name has already a copyright that makes this necessary.
> Maybe this could be documented in the manpage ? There is already:
Any suggestion for a paragraph?
> I think it is lik
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 02:00:26PM +0200, Hilmar Preuße wrote:
> On 04.05.2018 13:38, Bill Allombert wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > Maybe this could be documented in the manpage? There is already:
> >
> > BUGS
> >This version of TeX implements a number of optional extensions.
> > In fact, many o
On 04.05.2018 13:38, Bill Allombert wrote:
Hi,
> Maybe this could be documented in the manpage? There is already:
>
> BUGS
>This version of TeX implements a number of optional extensions.
> In fact, many of these extensions conflict to a greater or lesser
> extent with the defini
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 12:37:36PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
> On Thu, 03 May 2018, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > While pdftex handles SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH, tex does not, which leads to
> > unreproducible DVI files.
>
> tex is tex as DEK wanted it. Please use etex, which is the pdftex
Hi Bill,
On Thu, 03 May 2018, Bill Allombert wrote:
> While pdftex handles SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH, tex does not, which leads to
> unreproducible DVI files.
tex is tex as DEK wanted it. Please use etex, which is the pdftex binary
producing dvi.
Can I close this bug?
Norbert
--
PREINING Norbert
Package: texlive-binaries
Version: 2018.20180416.47457-1
Severity: wishlist
While pdftex handles SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH, tex does not, which leads to
unreproducible DVI files.
Cheers,
--
Bill.
Imagine a large red swirl here.
10 matches
Mail list logo
