HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
archlinux
svntogit-community
Shell2021–2023
archlinux / svntogit-community · Archived

svntogit-community

Automatic import of svn 'community' repo (read-only mirror)

Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
10Distinct people
10Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
297GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Automatic import of svn 'community' repo (read-only mirror)

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 12:45:45 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by month10 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2021-08-21 19:42:34 UTC to 2023-08-04 14:59:59 UTC.

0122021-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsAug 20212021-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2021-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2021-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2022-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsAug 20222022-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2022-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2022-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2023-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsAug 2023

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Aug 20212021-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-09-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Sep 20212021-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-10-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Oct 20212021-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-11-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 20212021-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-12-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Dec 20212021-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-02-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 20222022-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-03-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 20222022-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-04-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Apr 20222022-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-05-01 00:00:00 UTC000
May 20222022-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-06-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 20222022-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-07-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 20222022-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-08-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 20222022-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-09-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Sep 20222022-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-10-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Oct 20222022-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-11-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 20222022-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-12-01 00:00:00 UTC202
Dec 20222022-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-02-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Feb 20232023-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-03-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 20232023-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-04-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 20232023-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-05-01 00:00:00 UTC000
May 20232023-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-06-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 20232023-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-07-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 20232023-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-08-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 20232023-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-09-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

2 sources
Foxboron·Nov 1, 2022
> Archlinux's PKGBUILD doesn't https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-community/blob/cf04bef... > Because of that, "docker version" on arch linux outputs that it was built on the actual day it was built, whenever that was, and each time it's built that string changes. Hence, not reproducible. Fwiw, I'm the maintainer of Docker on Arch and this is a bit more complicated. Arch doesn't need to care about build time because `pacman` sets `SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH` during package building which is then utilized by the docker build system. https://github.com/moby/moby/commit/760763e9957840f1983a5006... If you look at the diff from an actual reproduction of the `docker` package (the Debian Reproducible Builds CI is a fuzzer), you will see there is no issues around build time. https://reproducible.archlinux.org/api/v0/builds/359851/diff... What you do se
Read the rest
e is some weird differences around `NT_GNU_BUILD_ID` and `GO BUILDID`. This is because of `lto`. In Arch we try to build most Go packages with cgo for the purpose of utilizing hardening flags. The issue is that the C code generation in Golang isn't actually reproducible with `lto` enabled. One issue is what I submitted here; https://github.com/golang/go/pull/53528 Another issue which I have been trying to debug is why the code snippet located here doesn't reproduce. https://pub.linderud.dev/cg/ This results in the BUILDID generated and sat by the cgo build process isn't reproducible. I could disable lto and all the binary hardening and docker would probably be reproducible, but where is the fun in that :)?
In Is my package reproducible yet?
TheDong·Nov 1, 2022
> Even if somebody links a package to their Git repo, who knows what commit correlates to a given release? Even if somebody pushes a "tag" for the release, there is still no guarantee that it's actually the same code That's not what reproducible means in this context. Being able to go from a given release artifact to a git repo is not what the "reproducible builds" project/movement/whatever is about. Reproducible builds are more about the packaging of something than about specific language ecosystems, so asking about languages that focus on reproducible builds makes less sense than asking about package ecosystems, build systems, and linux distros that do. Let's look at an example: docker is written in go, and is marked as reproducible in debian, but unreproducible in archlinux: https://ismypackagereproducibleyet.org/?pkg=docker&query=que.
Read the rest
.. (named docker.io on debian https://ismypackagereproducibleyet.org/?pkg=docker.io&query=...) Why is that? Well, debian sets the "version.BuildTime" option when it compiles it to a constant value each time it compiles it: https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/packages/docker/-/blob/4f1f... Archlinux's PKGBUILD doesn't https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-community/blob/cf04bef... Because of that, "docker version" on arch linux outputs that it was built on the actual day it was built, whenever that was, and each time it's built that string changes. Hence, not reproducible. Reproducible builds are about capturing enough information about how something is built, and specific enough build instructions, that two people can produce the same bit-for-bit identical output, and therefore verify that someone didn't compile a malicious backdoored binary, and also increase the chance that each build consistently works or doesn't work, regardless of who compiles it when.
In Is my package reproducible yet?

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.