Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make the output reproducible. #1048

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

lamby
Copy link

@lamby lamby commented Jan 2, 2017

Whilst working on the Reproducible Builds effort [0], we noticed
that yardoc generates output that is not reproducible due to the
use of a fallback glob that relies on (non-deterministic)
filesystem ordering.

[0] https://reproducible-builds.org/

Signed-off-by: Chris Lamb chris@chris-lamb.co.uk

Description

Describe your pull request and problem statement here.

Completed Tasks

  • I have read the Contributing Guide.
  • The pull request is complete (implemented / written).
  • Git commits have been cleaned up (squash WIP / revert commits).
  • I wrote tests and ran bundle exec rake locally (if code is attached to PR).

Whilst working on the Reproducible Builds effort [0], we noticed
that yardoc generates output that is not reproducible due to the
use of a fallback glob that relies on (non-deterministic)
filesystem ordering.

 [0] https://reproducible-builds.org/

Signed-off-by: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>
@lsegal
Copy link
Owner

lsegal commented Jan 2, 2017

You would have to sort the globs, not the entire list. One of YARD's features is allowing manual ordering of the source list.

@lamby
Copy link
Author

lamby commented Jan 2, 2017

(This is also filed in Debian as https://bugs.debian.org/849972)

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jan 2, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 93.483% when pulling 1c4476d on lamby:reproducible-output into e8fb64a on lsegal:master.

@lamby
Copy link
Author

lamby commented Jan 2, 2017

sort the globs

Well, surely expand the default glob and sort only that, not sort the glob itself? ;)

@lsegal
Copy link
Owner

lsegal commented Jan 2, 2017

Well, surely expand the default glob and sort only that, not sort the glob itself? ;)

Yes, I meant that. Also note that it is already being sorted, but by length-- that has to stick around too.

@lamby
Copy link
Author

lamby commented Jan 2, 2017

Ah, interesting. My Ruby isn't that great alas - would a patch be easy for you to prepare? Happy to test it.

@lsegal
Copy link
Owner

lsegal commented Jan 2, 2017

Sure. If you close this and open an issue for the bug we can track it there.

@lamby
Copy link
Author

lamby commented Jan 2, 2017

Closing as requested in favour of #1049

@lamby lamby closed this Jan 2, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants