Re: Making javadoc reproducible

[Gábor Boskovits]

Chris Marusich <address@hidden> ezt írta (időpont: 2018. okt.
14., V, 5:35):
>
> Hi Gábor and Vagrant,
>
> Vagrant Cascadian <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > There's been some discussion about this in Debian and in reproducible
> > builds:
> >
> >   https://bugs.debian.org/783938
> >
> >   
> > https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/TimestampsInDocumentationGeneratedByJavadoc
> >
> >   
> > https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/issues/unstable/timestamps_in_documentation_generated_by_javadoc_issue.html
> >
> > Hope it's useful!
>
> Thank you for the links!
>

Yes, thank you!

> Gábor Boskovits <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Björn Höfling <address@hidden> ezt írta (időpont:
> > 2018. okt. 12., P, 20:01):
> >>
> >> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 19:35:51 +0200
> >> Gábor Boskovits <address@hidden> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Gábor Boskovits <address@hidden> ezt írta (időpont: 2018. okt.
> >> > 12., P, 19:00):
> >> > >
> >> > > Hello guix,
> >> > >
> >> > > I've tracked down the javadoc timestamp problem.
> >> > > 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?
> >> >
> >> > Also we can simply turn off the timestamp generation
> >> > unconditionally...
> >>
> >> Number 2 sounds good, and why not giving it a try to place it upstream?
> >
> > Ok, i will go for it, and try to get it upsreamed for jdk8 and jdk11.
>
> Be sure to check out the links Vagrant posted.  Specifically this one:
>
> https://bugs.debian.org/783938
>
> In that bug report, Samuel Thibault says: "Perhaps javadoc could be made
> to use by default the SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH environment variable when it is
> defined?"  There seems to be agreement that teaching javadoc to honor
> the SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH environment variable would be preferable to
> unconditionally disabling the timestamp behavior.
>

Yes, I've also came to that conclusion reading the discussion, andI
have a came up with a patch.
I'm testing it right now, will report back if I have the results.

> --
> Chris