You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@trafficserver.apache.org by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> on 2013/03/01 00:49:47 UTC
[PROPOSAL] End of Life of RHEL4 (CentOS4 etc.) support
Hi all,
with RedHat moving RHEL4 into extended support as of 2012, I think we
should stop supporting RHEL4 (and derivatives) for ATS. Meaning, we will
no longer try to compile / run on these platforms.
We still will support RHEL5 and later, which implies the lowest gcc
version we need to support is gcc v4.1.2. RHEL5 kernel is v2.6.18, which
is the older kernel I propose we support. It's obviously OK to use new
features in newer kernels, with appropriate #ifdef's etc., but the
default build needs to complete and pass regression on the RHEL5 (and
derivatives) standard platform.
Any concerns with this?
--- Leif
Re: [PROPOSAL] End of Life of RHEL4 (CentOS4 etc.) support
Posted by 永豪 <yo...@taobao.com>.
＋1
nice to supporting EL5, it is the main platform in most of the sites.
thanks
在 2013-2-28，下午3:53，Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk> 写道：
> On 02/28/2013 03:49 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> with RedHat moving RHEL4 into extended support as of 2012, I think we
>> should stop supporting RHEL4 (and derivatives) for ATS. Meaning, we will
>> no longer try to compile / run on these platforms.
>>
>> We still will support RHEL5 and later, which implies the lowest gcc
>> version we need to support is gcc v4.1.2. RHEL5 kernel is v2.6.18, which
>> is the older kernel I propose we support. It's obviously OK to use new
>> features in newer kernels, with appropriate #ifdef's etc., but the
>> default build needs to complete and pass regression on the RHEL5 (and
>> derivatives) standard platform.
>>
>> Any concerns with this?
>>
>> --- Leif
>>
> +1
> We'll need to revert igor's commit about the minimum required version of
> gcc, but other than that, let rhel4 go diaf.
>
> (on a side note, Thunderbird doesn't think rhel is a real word, but it
> accepts rhel4...highly odd)
Re: [PROPOSAL] End of Life of RHEL4 (CentOS4 etc.) support
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 02/28/2013 03:49 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> with RedHat moving RHEL4 into extended support as of 2012, I think we
> should stop supporting RHEL4 (and derivatives) for ATS. Meaning, we will
> no longer try to compile / run on these platforms.
>
> We still will support RHEL5 and later, which implies the lowest gcc
> version we need to support is gcc v4.1.2. RHEL5 kernel is v2.6.18, which
> is the older kernel I propose we support. It's obviously OK to use new
> features in newer kernels, with appropriate #ifdef's etc., but the
> default build needs to complete and pass regression on the RHEL5 (and
> derivatives) standard platform.
>
> Any concerns with this?
>
> --- Leif
>
+1
We'll need to revert igor's commit about the minimum required version of
gcc, but other than that, let rhel4 go diaf.
(on a side note, Thunderbird doesn't think rhel is a real word, but it
accepts rhel4...highly odd)
RE: [PROPOSAL] End of Life of RHEL4 (CentOS4 etc.) support
Posted by Luca Rea <lu...@contactlab.com>.
RedHat is working on RHEL7, +1
Re: [PROPOSAL] End of Life of RHEL4 (CentOS4 etc.) support
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 03/07/2013 03:31 AM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> On 3/4/13 11:15 PM, James Peach wrote:
>> On 28/02/2013, at 3:49 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> We still will support RHEL5 and later, which implies the lowest gcc
>>> version we need to support is gcc v4.1.2. RHEL5 kernel is v2.6.18,
>>> which is the older kernel I propose we support. It's obviously OK to
>>> use new features in newer kernels, with appropriate #ifdef's etc.,
>>> but the default build needs to complete and pass regression on the
>>> RHEL5 (and derivatives) standard platform.
>>>
>>> Any concerns with this?
>> Nope, but we should update
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TS/Supported+Operating+Systems
>>
>>
>
>
> Wow, that page is incredibly out of date. Do we need to list every
> 32/64-bit version, and do we really want to have "owners" for each of
> these?
>
> -- Leif
>
owners seems like a stupid idea. Dunno about listing every version,
there are pros and cons to that, though since we do support gcc 4.2.1, I
suppose listing all the Ubuntu versions fx is silly, since they all have
4.2.1 as a bare minimum.
All in all, +1 to cleaning up that mess. Too much information of the
unnecessary kind.
With regards,
Daniel.
Re: [PROPOSAL] End of Life of RHEL4 (CentOS4 etc.) support
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
On 3/4/13 11:15 PM, James Peach wrote:
> On 28/02/2013, at 3:49 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
>> We still will support RHEL5 and later, which implies the lowest gcc version we need to support is gcc v4.1.2. RHEL5 kernel is v2.6.18, which is the older kernel I propose we support. It's obviously OK to use new features in newer kernels, with appropriate #ifdef's etc., but the default build needs to complete and pass regression on the RHEL5 (and derivatives) standard platform.
>>
>> Any concerns with this?
> Nope, but we should update https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TS/Supported+Operating+Systems
>
Wow, that page is incredibly out of date. Do we need to list every 32/64-bit
version, and do we really want to have "owners" for each of these?
-- Leif
Re: [PROPOSAL] End of Life of RHEL4 (CentOS4 etc.) support
Posted by Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org>.
> > Any concerns with this?
>
> Nope, but we should update
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TS/Supported+Operating+Systems
Yeah, this looks horribly outdated and not terribly useful either.
Maybe we should scrap it all together, have a seperate thing in the
docs that points to supported platforms, which is essentially an extract
of the README. (I'm working on moving the docs into the git tree btw)
> J
-- i
Igor Galić
Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
Mail: i.galic@brainsware.org
URL: http://brainsware.org/
GPG: 6880 4155 74BD FD7C B515 2EA5 4B1D 9E08 A097 C9AE
Re: [PROPOSAL] End of Life of RHEL4 (CentOS4 etc.) support
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
On 3/4/13 11:15 PM, James Peach wrote:
> On 28/02/2013, at 3:49 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
>> We still will support RHEL5 and later, which implies the lowest gcc version we need to support is gcc v4.1.2. RHEL5 kernel is v2.6.18, which is the older kernel I propose we support. It's obviously OK to use new features in newer kernels, with appropriate #ifdef's etc., but the default build needs to complete and pass regression on the RHEL5 (and derivatives) standard platform.
>>
>> Any concerns with this?
> Nope, but we should update https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TS/Supported+Operating+Systems
>
Wow, that page is incredibly out of date. Do we need to list every 32/64-bit
version, and do we really want to have "owners" for each of these?
-- Leif
Re: [PROPOSAL] End of Life of RHEL4 (CentOS4 etc.) support
Posted by James Peach <jp...@apache.org>.
On 28/02/2013, at 3:49 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> with RedHat moving RHEL4 into extended support as of 2012, I think we should stop supporting RHEL4 (and derivatives) for ATS. Meaning, we will no longer try to compile / run on these platforms.
+1
>
> We still will support RHEL5 and later, which implies the lowest gcc version we need to support is gcc v4.1.2. RHEL5 kernel is v2.6.18, which is the older kernel I propose we support. It's obviously OK to use new features in newer kernels, with appropriate #ifdef's etc., but the default build needs to complete and pass regression on the RHEL5 (and derivatives) standard platform.
>
> Any concerns with this?
Nope, but we should update https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TS/Supported+Operating+Systems
J
Re: [PROPOSAL] End of Life of RHEL4 (CentOS4 etc.) support
Posted by James Peach <jp...@apache.org>.
On 28/02/2013, at 3:49 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> with RedHat moving RHEL4 into extended support as of 2012, I think we should stop supporting RHEL4 (and derivatives) for ATS. Meaning, we will no longer try to compile / run on these platforms.
+1
>
> We still will support RHEL5 and later, which implies the lowest gcc version we need to support is gcc v4.1.2. RHEL5 kernel is v2.6.18, which is the older kernel I propose we support. It's obviously OK to use new features in newer kernels, with appropriate #ifdef's etc., but the default build needs to complete and pass regression on the RHEL5 (and derivatives) standard platform.
>
> Any concerns with this?
Nope, but we should update https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TS/Supported+Operating+Systems
J