Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] build: specify minimum versions of make and binutils

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 18.01.16 at 18:21, <cardoe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 1/18/16 11:03 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 18.01.16 at 17:53, <cardoe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> To help people avoid having to figure out what versions of make and
>>> binutils need to be supported document them explicitly. The version of
>>> binutils that had to be supported was mentioned in
>>> http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-01/msg00609.html 
>>> as 2.17. Knowing that Jan got these versions from SLES10 I looked up the
>>> version of GNU make from the same vintage (mid-2006) and landed on 3.81.
>> 
>> I'm afraid that same SLE10 has been using binutils 2.16.9<n>.<something>
>> and make 3.80. While (still building Xen there once in a while) I'd probably
>> not be in big trouble if we decided we don't want to support that old an
>> environment anymore, I don't think we can just go and document higher
>> versions than we so far allowed. We'd first need to settle on where to
>> draw the line nowadays (which then likely would mean a gcc minimal
>> version bum too).
> 
> Not a problem. I was just trying to take the situation from a guessing
> game to be explicitly called out. I was documenting what my logic was
> behind the version numbers I selected. I wasn't able to compare dates
> with binutils because their repo goes from 2003 to 2011 [1]. So I went
> back to SLES10's release date [2] and the GCC 4.1.0 release date [3] to
> compare it with GNU make [4].
> 
> Honestly I'd be happy if we just drew a line in the sand so that its
> clear what I need to test against when I submit patches. I don't really
> care where the line is.

Then how about 2.16.1 and 3.80 respectively as the initial line?

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel