Re: [gnu-prog-discuss] Reproducible GNU!

[John Darrington]

On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 02:39:13PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
     On Sat, Dec 05, 2015 at 10:19:40PM +0100, John Darrington wrote:
     > On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 04:47:59PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
     >      
     >      
     >      Reproducible builds are the technical means by which we can give 
users a
     >      chance to make sure they get the Corresponding Source, as the GPL 
calls
     >      it, for a given binary.  If a package can be rebuilt by anyone, 
yielding
     >      a bit-for-bit identical result, then users can make sure they get
     >      genuine binaries.  For more background, see:
     >      
     >        https://reproducible-builds.org/
     >      
     >      The Debian non-reproducibility issue database, which is going to be
     >      shared with other distros and interested parties, contains many
     >      examples of these:
     >      
     >        https://reproducible.debian.net/index_issues.html
     >      
     >      I invite you GNU hackers to look into it and see whether there???s
     >      something you can do to improve your package. 
     > 
     > 
     > PSPP is listed here, due to the date stamps in the pspp.pot file.  
     > 
     > What do people think?  Should we remove the date stamp, replace it with 
a something else
     > (date of the most recent commit) or what?
     
     I've never used the date stamp and I'm not sure I knew there was one in
     there.  Is it useful?  Otherwise let's just remove it.

Ok.  I have remove all the POT-Creation timestamps.  If it causes problems or 
if the translators
or anyone else complain, then it's not a big deal to put them back again.

J'

-- 
Avoid eavesdropping.  Send strong encryted email.
PGP Public key ID: 1024D/2DE827B3 
fingerprint = 8797 A26D 0854 2EAB 0285  A290 8A67 719C 2DE8 27B3
See http://sks-keyservers.net or any PGP keyserver for public key.

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature