GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 789619
Please use @basename@ to fix build reproducibility and multiarch conflict
Last modified: 2018-08-30 09:40:59 UTC
Created attachment 362487 [details] [review] proposed fix Hello, atk-enum-types.* use @filename@, but this includes the build path, and thus bring unreproducibility, and also conflicts when installing multiple builds for multiple archs (e.g. 64bit+32bit) in the same system. The attached patch makes it use @basename@ instead, which only includes the base of the file name (this is available in glib since 2.21). Samuel
*** Bug 790337 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(In reply to Michael Catanzaro from comment #1) > *** Bug 790337 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** At least that duplicated served as a ping for the original one. (In reply to Samuel Thibault from comment #0) > Created attachment 362487 [details] [review] > proposed fix Sorry, I missed this bug+patch. > Hello, > > atk-enum-types.* use @filename@, but this includes the build path, and thus > bring unreproducibility, and also conflicts when installing multiple builds > for multiple archs (e.g. 64bit+32bit) in the same system. Ok. Makes sense. > The attached patch makes it use @basename@ instead, which only includes the > base of the file name (this is available in glib since 2.21). My only concern is how this change was not already done on gtk+. As far as I understand this would affect both gtk+ and atk, as gtk+ also have some templates. As gtk+ is more popular, I was expecting the same issue already raised. But I don't see the equivalent bug for gtk+. Or Im being too paranoid and it is just that was detected first on atk?
gtk+3.0 is currently not reproducible for other reasons too, so I guess nothing was reported there just by luck and it just happens that I noticed it on the atk package first.
(In reply to Samuel Thibault from comment #3) > gtk+3.0 is currently not reproducible for other reasons too, so I guess > nothing was reported there just by luck and it just happens that I noticed > it on the atk package first. Fair enough.
Review of attachment 362487 [details] [review]: I don't have too much experience with the templates, but lgtm
So, can it be commited? :)
(In reply to Samuel Thibault from comment #6) > So, can it be commited? :) Ups sorry. Usually when the reviewer sets it to accepted-commit_now status, the patch author commits it. Do you need me to push the commit?
I still don't have a gnome account, so please do :)
(In reply to Samuel Thibault from comment #8) > I still don't have a gnome account, so please do :) Patch pushed. Thanks for the patch. But fwiw, next time I would appreciate a patch created by git format-patch, so applying it would be as easy as git am <patch> Closing bug.