From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Danny Milosavljevic Subject: Re: Making javadoc reproducible Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 12:09:46 +0200 Message-ID: <20181015120946.458cd536@scratchpost.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; boundary="Sig_/=o=eK9DkHC2CBvPc6AHQ1TM"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40002) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gBzp0-0006er-87 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 06:09:59 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gBzox-0002l4-1Y for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 06:09:58 -0400 Received: from dd26836.kasserver.com ([85.13.145.193]:33134) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gBzow-0002jB-PP for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 06:09:54 -0400 In-Reply-To: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E1bor?= Boskovits Cc: Guix-devel --Sig_/=o=eK9DkHC2CBvPc6AHQ1TM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Gabor, > There is a command line flag for javadoc (notimestamp), that disables > generating the comment in the docs that contains the timestamp. > Currently I see two ways forward: > 1. Track down the calls to javadoc, and add the flag to all calls. > 2. Write a simple patch to make javadoc behave as if notimestamp was > specified, whenever > SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is defined. > I do not think, that the patch produced by 2 is upstreamable, but it > seems much less work. WDYT? I'd like option 2 more. Also, I think it should be upstreamable. Thanks for working on tihs! I've meant to tackle this for quite some time but I didn't find how icedtea gets the jdk sources in the first place (in order to patch it). Putting a patch into the "patches" subdir blindly should work, but I didn't try. --Sig_/=o=eK9DkHC2CBvPc6AHQ1TM Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEds7GsXJ0tGXALbPZ5xo1VCwwuqUFAlvEZ2oACgkQ5xo1VCww uqUu4ggAjCr1jd4hvgUVb8ZSokBGtohgf+9a5JQruuzbXezNW/bloXY/l6Qry7Z6 QMX2c2XAryIzGddZRZtuOrtOj59//8q5t4faeeMoKi+7EQsae1WrkI1/lPTZJ+yu SAuJTSIJ9maSakQj6JGUV7e2evC4Dwl47GJXe8PMI42BhIK18DhEKOfEc7wqVkYU 17VeKPMqUq74ANfz06NnNecCqTwSMPvE0asM7p9Roh8tskdSP7ajMfVMCujQGiUw CDKWqtfRhvex6FzAe+Mhkv8HOAqRdnsqhrJxmS6Uwu2sW3LxRWb4jfYLCCSyre9n /18jlxwVtltj6YOMQbVEy2yvqi9sqw== =LRLn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/=o=eK9DkHC2CBvPc6AHQ1TM--