* Chris Hofstaedtler , 2025-01-05 23:58:
Maybe you can consider using a time namespace (unshare -T) and change
the system date/time in that namespace.
I don't think that would work. From time_namespaces(7):
"Note that time namespaces do not virtualize the CLOCK_REALTIME clock.
Virtualization
On Sun, 05 Jan 2025 at 23:58:40 +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> as we've seen in the time_t-64 transition, programs that interpose
> library calls like this are extremely hard to get right and very
> brittle.
>
> I would strongly suggest to not put new load-bearing stuff on top of
> such a prog
On Sun, Jan 05, 2025 at 11:58:40PM +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> Maybe you can consider using a time namespace (unshare -T) and
> change the system date/time in that namespace.
I'd also strongly suggest to do a full archive rebuild in such namespace
comparing that with a full archive rebuild
[ moving technical discussion to -devel, as -release was
just to ask RM for a calendar to raise severities ]
[ Bcc to Holger on this one ]
El 5/1/25 a las 23:59, Holger Levsen escribió:
so what did you use?
I still change the system clock. So, the same you did.
On Sun, Jan 05, 2025 at 09:28:24PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > Did you use libfaketime in this round of rebuilds?
> No, I did not use libfaketime yet (sorry).
so what did you use?
setting the system time to the future (like we've been doing for
tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian for many
Hi,
* Otto Kekäläinen [250105 21:54]:
> Thanks for encouragement. I filed
> https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline/-/issues/411 and will
> continue research on libfaketime/datefudge in CI there.
as we've seen in the time_t-64 transition, programs that interpose
library calls like this a
El 5/1/25 a las 21:07, Otto Kekäläinen escribió:
This is an update for my previous MBF announcement here:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2024/05/msg00414.html
I did another test rebuild and found 11 new packages failing
in the not-so-distant future. I also found another package
for which
Thanks for encouragement. I filed
https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline/-/issues/411 and will
continue research on libfaketime/datefudge in CI there.
Em 5 de janeiro de 2025 15:28:24 GMT-05:00, Santiago Vila
escreveu:
>El 5/1/25 a las 21:07, Otto Kekäläinen escribió:
>>> This is an update for my previous MBF announcement here:
>>>
>>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2024/05/msg00414.html
>>>
>>> I did another test rebuild and found
Hi!
> This is an update for my previous MBF announcement here:
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2024/05/msg00414.html
>
> I did another test rebuild and found 11 new packages failing
> in the not-so-distant future. I also found another package
> for which the fix was lost and the bug had
Hello.
This is an update for my previous MBF announcement here:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2024/05/msg00414.html
I did another test rebuild and found 11 new packages failing
in the not-so-distant future. I also found another package
for which the fix was lost and the bug had to reope
11 matches
Mail list logo
