From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 36980 invoked by alias); 21 Sep 2017 11:37:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 36960 invoked by uid 89); 21 Sep 2017 11:36:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:1035, H*M:2083 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 11:36:58 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8B2361462; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 11:36:56 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com B8B2361462 Authentication-Results: ext-mx10.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx10.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=palves@redhat.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3505B18000; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 11:36:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: meaning of "Automatic date update in version.in" commits To: Petr Ovtchenkov , Matt Rice References: <20170921135845.479dfc76@void-ptr.info> Cc: Fiodar Stryzhniou , Andreas Schwab , Binutils , Joel Brobecker , Matthias Klose , GDB From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <024439c7-2083-d368-0138-2160e4494b81@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 11:37:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170921135845.479dfc76@void-ptr.info> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-09/txt/msg00074.txt.bz2 On 09/21/2017 11:58 AM, Petr Ovtchenkov wrote: > Date is worst thing that you may use in SONAME. Especially in conjunction > with attempts to use DVCS as date source. (D == _Distributed_, so _no > time ordering_). And I should repeat: > > - from datestamps equality not follow ABI compatibility, > - from datestamps inequality not follow ABI incompatibility. > > What you want achieve with SONAME variations? What do _you_ want to achieve with removing the date stamps? You started the thread with: > This commits (...) create problems for > deterministic, bit-identical and/or verifiable builds. ... which is false. The rest of the thread seems like trying to change the goal post in order to justify change so that as side effect we'd fix the problem with determinism that you claimed exists, but that doesn't actually exist. I.e., this whole thread feels like the classical XY problem. What is the actual problem that you're trying to solve? Thanks, Pedro Alves