minimum requirements

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

minimum requirements

Markus Wanner-2
Hi,

after quite some messages about C++11, I feel like I still don't have a
better idea of what the set of supported platforms should be. Quite
independent of C++11 (especially as "builds on" and "runs on" are
slightly different capabilities).

Please consider that each platform in the set needs somewhat regular
care and love - some more, some less, but keeping monotone running
properly on any one is an effort. Announcing a platform is no longer
supported is almost free. The question is not: "What platforms can we
evict from that set?", but rather: "What platforms can we reasonably
keep up with?". (And related: "Which ones are you willing to help with?")


Stephen wants these (and supports them by occasional manual testing):
 * RHEL 6
 * Windows / Msys 2
 * Cygwin

Thomas Keller provides:
 * MacPorts packaging

Jeff Rizzo provides:
 * pkgsrc packaging for NetBSD

Lapo provides:
 * FreeBSD packaging

Thomas Moschny (promised to) provide:
 * Fedora packaging

My personal minimum requirements (and packaging contributions):
 * Debian wheezy (stable)
 * Ubuntu LTS (precise)


On my wishlist (for minimum requirements):
 * Mac OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion) / XCode 5
 * FreeBSD 10
 * NetBSD 6.1
 * Gentoo Hardened
 * Solaris 10

On Hendrik's wishlist:
 * Debian squeeze (oldstable)
 * Windows XP


I would like to explicitly exclude these:
 * Debian oldstable (squeeze)
 * all Ubuntu before precise (i.e. older than the last LTS)

I'm currently providing quite a few build animals to hit my targets and
to make my wishes come true. If you want to keep a platform supported,
please consider contributing a buildbot or at least run occasional tests
on that platform.

Regards

Markus Wanner


P.S: in the above list, I counted all those that have packaged release
1.1 or promised to do so, by now. Feel free to correct me if you're
somehow supporting that recent release, but are not listed above.


_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel

signature.asc (250 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minimum requirements

Hendrik Boom-2
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 07:12:20PM +0200, Markus Wanner wrote:
>
> On Hendrik's wishlist:
>  * Debian squeeze (oldstable)
>  * Windows XP

I just wanted to mention that I myself am using neither of these platforms,
though I have Windows XP available if I should need it.
It's more that squeeze looks like it's going to be a LTS release for a while,
and there's *lots* of people sticking with Windows XP.  How many of
them use monotone is another question entirely.

I *do* use Debian wheezy and jessie for development, normally using
Debian's packaged monotone.

>
>
> I would like to explicitly exclude these:
>  * Debian oldstable (squeeze)
>  * all Ubuntu before precise (i.e. older than the last LTS)

It's  only the LTS argument that made me recommend squeeze.

-- hendrik

_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minimum requirements

Ludovic Brenta-2
Hendrik Boom <[hidden email]> writes:
> It's more that squeeze looks like it's going to be a LTS release for a
> while,

"for a while" being defined as "until February 2016" and "not supported
by Debian itself", see https://www.debian.org/News/2014/20140424.html.

If you yourself don't use Squeeze anymore and if nobody has explicitly
requested support, there is no point in expending effort on it.

--
Ludovic.

_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minimum requirements

Hendrik Boom-2
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 10:14:03PM +0200, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> Hendrik Boom <[hidden email]> writes:
> > It's more that squeeze looks like it's going to be a LTS release for a
> > while,
>
> "for a while" being defined as "until February 2016" and "not supported
> by Debian itself", see https://www.debian.org/News/2014/20140424.html.
>
> If you yourself don't use Squeeze anymore and if nobody has explicitly
> requested support, there is no point in expending effort on it.

Sounds reasonable.

-- hendrik

_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minimum requirements

Stephen Leake-3
In reply to this post by Markus Wanner-2
Markus Wanner <[hidden email]> writes:

> Stephen wants these (and supports them by occasional manual testing):
>  * RHEL 6
>  * Windows / Msys 2
>  * Cygwin

Someone else (Lapo? ) has been providing Cygwin packages, but 1.1 hasn't
happened yet.

--
-- Stephe

_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minimum requirements

Markus Wanner-2
In reply to this post by Markus Wanner-2
On 05/16/2014 07:12 PM, Markus Wanner wrote:
> Stephen wants these (and supports them by occasional manual testing):
>  * RHEL 6

Minor update on the RHEL front: build animal armadillo (effectively
running CentOS 6.5) now uses a g++ 4.8.2 from the devtools-2 package.

With that, it now fails to compile nvm, because with the new compiler,
C++11 gets enabled. But the old boost headers on that platform do not
seem to cope well with C++11. So using C++11 with old-ish boost
(armadillo uses boost 1.41) doesn't work.

Note that the branch nvm.mandatory-cxx11 works just fine (as it doesn't
use much of boost, anymore). So does disabling C++11 on nvm.

To me, that's yet another argument to mandate C++11: Otherwise, we
couldn't just turn it on if the compiler is capable enough, but would
have to check if boost is recent enough, as well. Or keep it turned off
entirely and stick with C++98.

Regards

Markus Wanner



_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel

signature.asc (250 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minimum requirements

Stephen Leake-3
Markus Wanner <[hidden email]> writes:

> On 05/16/2014 07:12 PM, Markus Wanner wrote:
>> Stephen wants these (and supports them by occasional manual testing):
>>  * RHEL 6
>
> Minor update on the RHEL front: build animal armadillo (effectively
> running CentOS 6.5) now uses a g++ 4.8.2 from the devtools-2 package.
>
> With that, it now fails to compile nvm, because with the new compiler,
> C++11 gets enabled. But the old boost headers on that platform do not
> seem to cope well with C++11. So using C++11 with old-ish boost
> (armadillo uses boost 1.41) doesn't work.

I install boost headers from source, not from the RPM package. I forgot
that part.

> Note that the branch nvm.mandatory-cxx11 works just fine (as it doesn't
> use much of boost, anymore). So does disabling C++11 on nvm.

Ok.

> To me, that's yet another argument to mandate C++11:

yes.

--
-- Stephe

_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minimum requirements

Markus Wanner-2
In reply to this post by Markus Wanner-2
Hi,

On 05/16/2014 07:12 PM, Markus Wanner wrote:
> On my wishlist (for minimum requirements):
>  * Mac OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion) / XCode 5

I successfully compiled and run tests of nvm.mandatory-cxx11 on Mountain
Lion, now.

As it turned out, the major stumbling block was that Apple (and
therefore MacPorts) defaults to use libstdc++ on that OS version, in a
version that doesn't offer proper C++11 support. Switching to libc++
(-stdlib=libc++) enables C++11 features. However, as those two are
incompatible, this also means you to link against botan and idna
libraries using that standard library. Therefore, I had to recompile
them against libc++, rather than using the packages provided by MacPorts.

Given that OS version reached EOL, already, I don't think that's a
hindrance for switching to C++11.

>  * FreeBSD 10
>  * NetBSD 6.1
>  * Gentoo Hardened
>  * Solaris 10

As per the build farm, these platforms now compile nvm.mandatory-cxx11
just fine:
  CentOS 6.5 (using g++ 4.8.2 from devtools-2 package)
  Cygwin
  Debian sid
  Gentoo Hardened
  MinGW / Msys 1.0
  NetBSD 6.1 (using gcc48)
  OmniOS r151008 (pretending to be SunOS 5.11)
  Ubuntu precise

Manual testing additionally yields good results on:
  Debian stable
  FreeBSD 10
  Mac OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion)


I just updated NEWS and INSTALL on nvm.mandatory-cxx11 to document the
new requirements. And I added installation instructions, please review.


Some comments regarding the few test failures:

 - cow, an Ubuntu 10.04 LTS (precise) box shows a failure on log_dir.
   That's the same test that fails on GNU Debian/hurd for the 1.0
   release. Therefore, I don't think that's related to C++11.

 - on boar, a Windows Server using MinGW / Msys 1.0 system, all extra
   tests fail. AFAICT these didn't ever work. (Looks rather like a lua
   issue.)

 - armadillo, the CentOS 6.5 box once failed on
   add,remove,cleanup_registered_workspaces, then passed. Looks like an
   intermittent issue, so it's hardly related to C++11, either.

 - wallaby runs Debian/sid using a bleeding-edge llvm/clang toolchain,
   which seems currently broken. My guess is that the standard library
   headers provided by the new gcc version (4.9.0) caused that breakage.
   In any case, I'm not too concerned about failures on that build
   animal in general.


> I'm currently providing quite a few build animals to hit my targets and
> to make my wishes come true. If you want to keep a platform supported,
> please consider contributing a buildbot or at least run occasional tests
> on that platform.

Given the above successes, the lack of offers to help with other
platforms and baring further objections, I plan to land
nvm.mandatory-cxx11 within the next few days.

Regards

Markus Wanner



_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel

signature.asc (250 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minimum requirements

Stephen Leake-3
Markus Wanner <[hidden email]> writes:

> As per the build farm, these platforms now compile nvm.mandatory-cxx11
> just fine:
>   CentOS 6.5 (using g++ 4.8.2 from devtools-2 package)
>   Cygwin
>   Debian sid
>   Gentoo Hardened
>   MinGW / Msys 1.0
>   NetBSD 6.1 (using gcc48)
>   OmniOS r151008 (pretending to be SunOS 5.11)
>   Ubuntu precise
>
> Manual testing additionally yields good results on:
>   Debian stable
>   FreeBSD 10
>   Mac OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion)

and MinGW / Msys 2.0 32 and 64 bit.

> Given the above successes, the lack of offers to help with other
> platforms and baring further objections, I plan to land
> nvm.mandatory-cxx11 within the next few days.

+1

--
-- Stephe

_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minimum requirements

Markus Wanner-2
On 05/28/2014 01:32 AM, Stephen Leake wrote:
> Markus Wanner <[hidden email]> writes:
>> Given the above successes, the lack of offers to help with other
>> platforms and baring further objections, I plan to land
>> nvm.mandatory-cxx11 within the next few days.
>
> +1

Landed.

Regards

Markus Wanner



_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel

signature.asc (250 bytes) Download Attachment