> a very pedantic definition of "reproducible builds" That's not a pedantic definition, that is the definition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducible_bui

> a very pedantic definition of "reproducible builds" That's not a pedantic definition, that is the definition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducible_builds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducible_builds > simply build an executable One does not "simply" build an executable of a ten year old game codebase on a modern system. Of course it might be worth putting the build system - by which I literally mean the hardware and software - in storage. Realistically though, with all the churn happening in the games industry, studios getting closed/moved right after the game ships, it's often just not happening, especially if the game is not a big success. > It's pathetic on Rockstar's part It's actually exactly the kind of "fuck the police" attitude that I expect from the studio responsible for a game like GTA. Groups like Razor1911 also have their own ethics, they're doing a good job, creating a version of the game that is better than the one that actually shipped.