From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs is not reproducible Date: Sat, 22 May 2021 23:31:50 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87lf8dcrcd.fsf@disroot.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="22677"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Bone Baboon Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun May 23 05:33:14 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lkerZ-0005iR-SH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 23 May 2021 05:33:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33482 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lkerY-0006jC-Sw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 22 May 2021 23:33:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33234) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lkeqO-0005hB-Qb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 22 May 2021 23:32:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:7671) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lkeqM-0005Su-D0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 22 May 2021 23:32:00 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 73B50100234; Sat, 22 May 2021 23:31:57 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id DDF9610020E; Sat, 22 May 2021 23:31:51 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1621740711; bh=xT2D0E6wZ6Z95+WRknrPdM2lqfdqfJ3OlZIDgLY9w3Y=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=lycs5oPiEv/acJCzyD3Mpt0kn63nB3cZEHyESABBkcqy7zNWlQ65EoHEzpAf/mF2J xSjvsw49ttsO3SpXTd7x0DmYyQGBvLPOKNUSMbqW5v8iwvzlNPt4rIJMqM05nu9Q4D VddPPWNVU1Gy8a1uCJ8+mhhXF2klbZQ8EGRta7TRlgTP/gVHH2z+hu5jqyiHkpXAH/ fZuAH81pEES0LLQ/to8xzW15ykePeJ7oDYDs3vFFU8zICkKieUhlcI9dblzTZgG2Yo a4uQ4v7kZfC8ylkOYXJnas7ocdgayLEk3WeSawySQV5/HOR9O84VerrICsy9Mseent tN1DWGVr6zekw== Original-Received: from alfajor (69-196-163-239.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.163.239]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AAD0F120B18; Sat, 22 May 2021 23:31:51 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Mon, 17 May 2021 12:40:39 -0400") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:269645 Archived-At: >> Is there currently any work underway to make Emacs reproducible? > There has been changes made in the past to fix some problems. > I have a pending patch in bug#46502 (see below) which aims to fix some > more of those problems, but still haven't heard confirmation that it > helps. This is quite odd: both in bug#46502 and here again I don't hear anything back from my proposal (not even some complaint that it doesn't apply or it breaks something), even tho all I'm asking if for someone to try and confirm whether it makes the build more (or less?) reproducible, which I thought should be reasonably easy to do. What am I missing? Stefan