|
Size: 1024
Comment: - minor wording fix
|
← Revision 17 as of 2022-10-03 23:23:54 ⇥
Size: 1045
Comment: link updates
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 9: | Line 9: |
| [[https://reproducible.debian.net/userContent/issues/timestamps_from_cpp_macros_issue.html|Known affected packages]] - this should soon drop in number as we rebuild things with the newer GCC. However there are [[https://codesearch.debian.net/results/__TIMESTAMP__|still some packages]] using `__TIMESTAMP__`. | [[https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/issues/unstable/timestamps_from_cpp_macros_issue.html|Known affected packages]] - this should soon drop in number as we rebuild things with the newer GCC. However there are [[https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=__TIMESTAMP__&literal=1|still some packages]] using `__TIMESTAMP__`. |
__DATE__, __TIME__ and __TIMESTAMP are part of the standard predefined macros of the C pre-processor.
Now that GCC has accepted our patch to support SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH, __DATE__ and __TIME__ will instead use that deterministic value, and package maintainers shouldn't need to do anything extra to make their builds reproducible.
We missed out __TIMESTAMP__ by mistake, but we will probably send in another patch to GCC to fix that.
Known affected packages - this should soon drop in number as we rebuild things with the newer GCC. However there are still some packages using __TIMESTAMP__.