From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 15:11:16 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 01/34] reproducibility: introduce config knob In-Reply-To: <87mvnzl70e.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> <20160509145309.1ae28c04@free-electrons.com> <87mvnzl70e.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> Message-ID: <20160509151116.1761093e@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 15:01:53 +0200, Peter Korsgaard wrote: > > 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. > > Ok, what timestamps exactly? Embedded timestamps like uname -v or > filesystem timestamps of the files? The one I use for the kernel is obviously the embedded time stamp, displayed at boot time (and also in uname -v). I guess the filesystem time stamps are not that useful, but they are the "easy" part (i.e they can be fixed globally when generating the filesystem image). The embedded timestamps all over the place in different programs/libraries are really the annoying part. Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com