From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 14:53:09 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 01/34] reproducibility: introduce config knob In-Reply-To: <878tzjn0du.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> References: <20160430074358.GE1781@hermes.click-hack.org> <1462002570-14706-1-git-send-email-gilles.chanteperdrix@xenomai.org> <878tzjn0du.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> Message-ID: <20160509145309.1ae28c04@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Mon, 09 May 2016 09:42:05 +0200, Peter Korsgaard wrote: > Hmm, I'm not sure I like the extra complexity of 2 ways of doing > things. What are the use cases for these timestamps? Are they important > enough to keep? I use timestamps all the time to verify that I'm indeed running the version of the code I intend to run. As I work on the kernel, I use the kernel timestamp, but I really use it all the time, to double check that I'm running the kernel image I just built and not one that was left around, built several days/weeks ago. So timestamps are useful IMO. Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com