Re: [PATCH] More reproducibility fixes for R.

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> writes:

> Ricardo Wurmus <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>> attached are more reproducibility fixes for R.  Unfortunately, it seems
>> that files of type “rdb”, “rdx”, and “rds” are still not reproducible.
>> This leaves us with the following files in R that are currently not
>> reproducible:
>
> Could it be that --built-timestamp is not honored for R modules within
> R?

With these two patches the flag *should* be honoured.  I don’t
understand yet where the rds differences come from, but I’ll
investigate this now.

> Do the Debian patches mentioned in #25598 help?

R 3.3.2 already includes the patches that were posted on Debian bug
#774031.  The patch at #782764 is the equivalent of our change to the
r-build-system to pass down the flag to R packages.


>> From e8cd2114b824ab6fed671c2214956ee22deeaedf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Ricardo Wurmus <address@hidden>
>> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 14:34:57 +0100
>> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] gnu: r: Fix syntax for INSTALL_OPTS.
>>
>> This is a follow-up to commit 4621acfd8272fa93d0530faa5f015b26a194b587.
>>
>> * gnu/packages/statistics.scm (r)[arguments]: Ensure that
>> "--built-timestamp" appears on the same line as the other INSTALL_OPTS.
>
> So the previous attempt had no effect, right?

Yeah, it was not effective and I failed to use “guix build --check”
properly (without grafts), so I thought everything was fine already.

>> From 95b939f662a29b3cc6973a2fba286f32faf010c1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Ricardo Wurmus <address@hidden>
>> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 15:40:02 +0100
>> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: r: Fix more reproducibility problems.
>>
>> * gnu/packages/statistics.scm (r)[arguments]: Patch locations in the
>> build system that need special treatment for reproducibility.
>
> LGTM, thanks!

I pushed both to master.

--
Ricardo

GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6  2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC
https://elephly.net