[Python-Dev] PEP 552: deterministic pycs

[Freddy Rietdijk]

> The main objection to that model is that it requires modifying source
timestamps, which isn't possible for builds on read-only source trees.

Why not set the source timestamps of the source trees to say 1 first?
That's what is done with the Nix package manager. The Python interpreter is
patched (mostly similar to the referred PR) and checks whether
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is set, and if so, sets the mtime to 1.

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:08 PM, Benjamin Peterson <benjamin at python.org>
wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017, at 14:00, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > On Thu, 07 Sep 2017 13:39:21 -0700
> > Benjamin Peterson <benjamin at python.org> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > I've written a short PEP about an import extension to allow pycs to be
> > > more deterministic by optional replacing the timestamp with a hash of
> > > the source file: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0552/
> >
> > Why isn't https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/296 a good enough
> > solution to this problem?  It has a simple implementation, and requires
> > neither maintaining two different pyc formats nor reading the entire
> > source file to check whether the pyc file is up to date.
>
> The main objection to that model is that it requires modifying source
> timestamps, which isn't possible for builds on read-only source trees.
> This proposal also allows reproducible builds even if the files are
> being modified in an edit-run-tests cycle.
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/
> freddyrietdijk%40fridh.nl
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20170907/8f543609/attachment.html>