MAMEWorld Forums - EmuChat - Re: MAME.exe no longer showing compile date?

> > > > > I think a better question would be to add 'on Windows' to what you're asking,
> > > > because
> > > > > I don't see why we should all have to put up with this BS just because of a
> > Linux
> > > > > distro.
> > > >
> > > > "This BS"? When on earth have you ever actually used this information, or are
> you
> > > > just arguing for the sake of arguing?
> > >
> > > I've restored backups from CD before (where file mod dates have been lost during
> > > burning etc.) and always found it handy to see when things were built.
> > >
> > > what we've replaced it with is just an additional version number, it tells you
> > > nothing of when the software was built, so we've essentially dropped a perfectly
> > > useful human readable field of data for the sake of some dumb linux distro.
> >
> > Except Debian is probably one of the top 5 Linux distributions, and it makes
> perfect
> > sense if you think of it from the perspective of being able to make reproducible
> > builds. Ideally, the user should be able to reproduce an identical binary to the
> one
> > that's currently being shipped. The fact that you're fucking ignorant that you
> think
> > that Debian is "some dumb linux distro" is evidence enough that you don't have a
> > fucking clue and have no basis for calling any kind of shots when it comes to this
> > sort of feature.
> >
> > For someone who bitches as much as you do as to the lack of contributors, you sure
> > don't seem to give a fuck about supporting a feature that would mean more
> > contributors. The fuck is wrong with you?
>
> I'm saying leave the date there on Windows, just because it's a popular thing to do
> on Linux, and it makes sense in some contexts doesn't mean it makes sense in all of
> them, it is typical dumb idealist Linux BS, I'm sorry, but things like this just
> reinforce my opinion there.
>
> There are reasons Windows is still the primary PC OS, and things like this (ie
> stripping information people can digest) is one of them, we don't need to fall into
> that trap, so yeah, give them what they want, but why take it away from everybody
> else too?
>
> You had a rant the other day about putting yourself in the shoes of ordinary users,
> and how being a dev can cloud that, this is a prime example, ordinary users prefer to
> see a build date.

Builds would be repeatable if instead of the build date it had the date of the GIT version (or whatever). Can't that be done somehow?