You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@mesos.apache.org by Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io> on 2015/06/25 19:40:00 UTC
Update minimum required automake version to 1.13
Hi All,
First off, I am not sure if we record the minimum required version of
automake/autoconf somewhere in the documentation.
Having said that, I want to propose to move to automake 1.13 in order to be
able to use the "AM_EXTRA_RECURSIVE_TARGETS" macro which allows us to add a
"test" target to just build the test and not run it. The issue is tracked
at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2273 and the corresponding
RRs have received some ship-its.
Best,
Kapil
==================
Compatibility notes:
Automake 1.13 came out in 2013 and here is the compatibility status for
leading distros:
* Debian: Since 8.0 [1].
* Ubuntu: Since 13.10 [2].
* Fedora: Since Fedora 20 [3].
* Centos: Since 7.0 [4].
1. https://packages.debian.org/jessie/automake
2. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+package/automake
3. https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/automake
4. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/
Re: Update minimum required automake version to 1.13
Posted by Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io>.
In order to better evaluate the current position of developers with respect
to autotools versions, is there a way we can do an informal poll to see how
many people are still using automake 1.11 or 1.12? If it's only a small
number of people, we can try to find an upgrade path for their
system/distro to upgrade automake. Is this a reasonable things to do/ask
for?
Kapil
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 4:24 PM, James Peach <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 25, 2015, at 11:01 PM, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:38 AM, Benjamin Mahler <
> benjamin.mahler@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Taking a step back, it looks like the patches in MESOS-2273 approached
> the
> >> problem assuming 1.13. Have you re-considered how you might approach it
> if
> >> you didn't have 1.13? Or is this 1.13 macro the only solution?
> >>
> >
> > Hmm, I went back to take another quick look at the situation and here is
> my
> > conclusion. The automake recursive targets makes the life somewhat easier
> > (and make the code less hackish) by taking care of recursive invocation
> of
> > the "tests" target for the subdirs. If we didn't have this new macro, the
> > approach would have been to add a "tests" target by hand to the
> appropriate
> > Makefile.am files (top-level, src/, 3rdparty/, and 3rdparty/libprocess).
> > This is what we have been doing for stuff like "maven-install" and
> "bench"
> > targets. So, if we were to go for the upgrade path, we might consider
> > rewriting some of these existing targets as well.
>
> Maybe I'm jumping in the middle without the full context, but why don't
> you just always build the tests? The way I have done this in other project
> is to always build the tests with noinst_ automake variables. Them "make
> check" will just depend on tests that are already built.
>
> You can then add a --enable-test-suite option to configure to cause the
> tests to be installed. This would be pretty useful since you could easily
> build a mesos-tests package for a CI pipeline.
>
> >> Worth noting that users can already build the tests without running
> them by
> >> specifying GTEST_FILTER="", so is the upgrade pain worth it? With gcc
> 4.8,
> >> we had a lot of benefits motivating us :)
> >>
> >
> > I do partially agree with you in that with gcc 4.8 we had huge benefits
> > compared to what we get with automake 1.13.
>
> Note that requiring gcc 4.8 affects everyone who build Mesos. Requiring
> more recent autotools mainly affects developers since autotools is not
> required for building from official source releases.
>
> J
Re: Update minimum required automake version to 1.13
Posted by James Peach <jo...@gmail.com>.
> On Jun 25, 2015, at 11:01 PM, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:38 AM, Benjamin Mahler <be...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Taking a step back, it looks like the patches in MESOS-2273 approached the
>> problem assuming 1.13. Have you re-considered how you might approach it if
>> you didn't have 1.13? Or is this 1.13 macro the only solution?
>>
>
> Hmm, I went back to take another quick look at the situation and here is my
> conclusion. The automake recursive targets makes the life somewhat easier
> (and make the code less hackish) by taking care of recursive invocation of
> the "tests" target for the subdirs. If we didn't have this new macro, the
> approach would have been to add a "tests" target by hand to the appropriate
> Makefile.am files (top-level, src/, 3rdparty/, and 3rdparty/libprocess).
> This is what we have been doing for stuff like "maven-install" and "bench"
> targets. So, if we were to go for the upgrade path, we might consider
> rewriting some of these existing targets as well.
Maybe I'm jumping in the middle without the full context, but why don't you just always build the tests? The way I have done this in other project is to always build the tests with noinst_ automake variables. Them "make check" will just depend on tests that are already built.
You can then add a --enable-test-suite option to configure to cause the tests to be installed. This would be pretty useful since you could easily build a mesos-tests package for a CI pipeline.
>> Worth noting that users can already build the tests without running them by
>> specifying GTEST_FILTER="", so is the upgrade pain worth it? With gcc 4.8,
>> we had a lot of benefits motivating us :)
>>
>
> I do partially agree with you in that with gcc 4.8 we had huge benefits
> compared to what we get with automake 1.13.
Note that requiring gcc 4.8 affects everyone who build Mesos. Requiring more recent autotools mainly affects developers since autotools is not required for building from official source releases.
J
Re: Update minimum required automake version to 1.13
Posted by Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io>.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:38 AM, Benjamin Mahler <be...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Taking a step back, it looks like the patches in MESOS-2273 approached the
> problem assuming 1.13. Have you re-considered how you might approach it if
> you didn't have 1.13? Or is this 1.13 macro the only solution?
>
Hmm, I went back to take another quick look at the situation and here is my
conclusion. The automake recursive targets makes the life somewhat easier
(and make the code less hackish) by taking care of recursive invocation of
the "tests" target for the subdirs. If we didn't have this new macro, the
approach would have been to add a "tests" target by hand to the appropriate
Makefile.am files (top-level, src/, 3rdparty/, and 3rdparty/libprocess).
This is what we have been doing for stuff like "maven-install" and "bench"
targets. So, if we were to go for the upgrade path, we might consider
rewriting some of these existing targets as well.
> Worth noting that users can already build the tests without running them by
> specifying GTEST_FILTER="", so is the upgrade pain worth it? With gcc 4.8,
> we had a lot of benefits motivating us :)
>
I do partially agree with you in that with gcc 4.8 we had huge benefits
compared to what we get with automake 1.13. Nevertheless, I would like to
quote Cody's comment from the RR in response to Dominic's question that was
along the same lines:
"Not much code, there is runtime / developer slow down overhead in
GTEST_FILTER (not documented, build test groups in clusters, just
running the constructors/destructors around the tests takes a bit). I
can also break the GTEST_FILTER setup (I can add a destructor to a
test which will generate SIGSEGV and break a "make check
GTEST_FILTER=''" even though tests compile).
This should enable parallelizing building all the tests in mesos rather
than doing them in chunks which should make things go quicker when I just
want to verify the tests build. Also makes it easier to seperate automated
builder failure states without relying on undocumented / non-explicit
behavior (compiling core, compiling tests, running tests)
Similar sentiments were expressed by Joris as well, if I remember correctly.
Having said that, if we decide that the automake upgrade path is too much
of a hassle, I would like to take a stab at adding the non-recursive
"tests" target. It definitely is less hackish than "make check
GTEST_FILTER=" :-).
Kapil
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io> wrote:
>
> > Apparently, there is a way to get latest the autotools on CentOS 5
> through
> > the same community that provides devtoolset:
> > https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/scls/praiskup/autotools/
> >
> > If the tools are available, would there be any other objections to move
> to
> > the newer versions?
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Benjamin Mahler <
> > benjamin.mahler@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Well, CentOS 5 users don't have to upgrade gcc, they can use
> > devtoolset-2.
> > > However, devtoolset-2 doesn't provide the newer automake FWICT.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Marco Massenzio <ma...@mesosphere.io>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Cody Maloney <co...@mesosphere.io>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > CentOS 5 and 6 don't come out of the box with a new enough version
> of
> > > GCC
> > > > > to compile Mesos. Already they need to upgrade that to compile
> > Mesos. I
> > > > > don't see how adding another upgrade when they have to do GCC is
> > overly
> > > > > onerous / should require lots of compatibility hacks to make
> > > unnecessary.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > +1
> > > > Different story for production servers; but build/dev machines are
> > > supposed
> > > > to use modern build/dev tools and environments (unless supporting an
> > > older
> > > > toolchain is a specific need for the project).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:17 PM Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > It's not available for CentOS 5/6 or the previous debian stable.
> I
> > > > guess
> > > > > > since we still want to keep supporting the older distros, one
> > > > possibility
> > > > > > is to create a patch for configure.ac which is applied during
> > > > > ./bootstrap
> > > > > > after detecting the automake version. Is this an acceptable
> > solution?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If this works, then we can decide on whether we want to patch it
> > for
> > > > > older
> > > > > > (< 1.13) or newer (>= 1.13) automake version. Is there a
> preference
> > > > > there?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kapil
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Jake Farrell <
> jfarrell@apache.org
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > we encountered a lot of issues in thrift between all the
> > backwards
> > > > > > > incompatible changes automake had in 1.12 to 1.14 and trying to
> > > > support
> > > > > > all
> > > > > > > the default versions across different distros. due to this we
> are
> > > > > > switching
> > > > > > > to cmake as well
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Jake
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Benjamin Mahler <
> > > > > > > benjamin.mahler@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What about CentOS 5 and 6?
> > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS#End-of-support_schedule
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Also, how does this interact with the effort to use CMake?
> > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-898
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Kapil Arya <
> > > kapil@mesosphere.io>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > First off, I am not sure if we record the minimum required
> > > > version
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > automake/autoconf somewhere in the documentation.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Having said that, I want to propose to move to automake
> 1.13
> > in
> > > > > order
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > able to use the "AM_EXTRA_RECURSIVE_TARGETS" macro which
> > allows
> > > > us
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > add a
> > > > > > > > > "test" target to just build the test and not run it. The
> > issue
> > > is
> > > > > > > tracked
> > > > > > > > > at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2273 and
> the
> > > > > > > > corresponding
> > > > > > > > > RRs have received some ship-its.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > > Kapil
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ==================
> > > > > > > > > Compatibility notes:
> > > > > > > > > Automake 1.13 came out in 2013 and here is the
> compatibility
> > > > status
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > leading distros:
> > > > > > > > > * Debian: Since 8.0 [1].
> > > > > > > > > * Ubuntu: Since 13.10 [2].
> > > > > > > > > * Fedora: Since Fedora 20 [3].
> > > > > > > > > * Centos: Since 7.0 [4].
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1. https://packages.debian.org/jessie/automake
> > > > > > > > > 2. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+package/automake
> > > > > > > > > 3. https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/automake
> > > > > > > > > 4. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Update minimum required automake version to 1.13
Posted by Benjamin Mahler <be...@gmail.com>.
Taking a step back, it looks like the patches in MESOS-2273 approached the
problem assuming 1.13. Have you re-considered how you might approach it if
you didn't have 1.13? Or is this 1.13 macro the only solution?
Worth noting that users can already build the tests without running them by
specifying GTEST_FILTER="", so is the upgrade pain worth it? With gcc 4.8,
we had a lot of benefits motivating us :)
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io> wrote:
> Apparently, there is a way to get latest the autotools on CentOS 5 through
> the same community that provides devtoolset:
> https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/scls/praiskup/autotools/
>
> If the tools are available, would there be any other objections to move to
> the newer versions?
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Benjamin Mahler <
> benjamin.mahler@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Well, CentOS 5 users don't have to upgrade gcc, they can use
> devtoolset-2.
> > However, devtoolset-2 doesn't provide the newer automake FWICT.
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Marco Massenzio <ma...@mesosphere.io>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Cody Maloney <co...@mesosphere.io>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > CentOS 5 and 6 don't come out of the box with a new enough version of
> > GCC
> > > > to compile Mesos. Already they need to upgrade that to compile
> Mesos. I
> > > > don't see how adding another upgrade when they have to do GCC is
> overly
> > > > onerous / should require lots of compatibility hacks to make
> > unnecessary.
> > > >
> > >
> > > +1
> > > Different story for production servers; but build/dev machines are
> > supposed
> > > to use modern build/dev tools and environments (unless supporting an
> > older
> > > toolchain is a specific need for the project).
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:17 PM Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > It's not available for CentOS 5/6 or the previous debian stable. I
> > > guess
> > > > > since we still want to keep supporting the older distros, one
> > > possibility
> > > > > is to create a patch for configure.ac which is applied during
> > > > ./bootstrap
> > > > > after detecting the automake version. Is this an acceptable
> solution?
> > > > >
> > > > > If this works, then we can decide on whether we want to patch it
> for
> > > > older
> > > > > (< 1.13) or newer (>= 1.13) automake version. Is there a preference
> > > > there?
> > > > >
> > > > > Kapil
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > we encountered a lot of issues in thrift between all the
> backwards
> > > > > > incompatible changes automake had in 1.12 to 1.14 and trying to
> > > support
> > > > > all
> > > > > > the default versions across different distros. due to this we are
> > > > > switching
> > > > > > to cmake as well
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Jake
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Benjamin Mahler <
> > > > > > benjamin.mahler@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > What about CentOS 5 and 6?
> > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS#End-of-support_schedule
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Also, how does this interact with the effort to use CMake?
> > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-898
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Kapil Arya <
> > kapil@mesosphere.io>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > First off, I am not sure if we record the minimum required
> > > version
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > automake/autoconf somewhere in the documentation.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Having said that, I want to propose to move to automake 1.13
> in
> > > > order
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > able to use the "AM_EXTRA_RECURSIVE_TARGETS" macro which
> allows
> > > us
> > > > to
> > > > > > > add a
> > > > > > > > "test" target to just build the test and not run it. The
> issue
> > is
> > > > > > tracked
> > > > > > > > at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2273 and the
> > > > > > > corresponding
> > > > > > > > RRs have received some ship-its.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > Kapil
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ==================
> > > > > > > > Compatibility notes:
> > > > > > > > Automake 1.13 came out in 2013 and here is the compatibility
> > > status
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > > leading distros:
> > > > > > > > * Debian: Since 8.0 [1].
> > > > > > > > * Ubuntu: Since 13.10 [2].
> > > > > > > > * Fedora: Since Fedora 20 [3].
> > > > > > > > * Centos: Since 7.0 [4].
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1. https://packages.debian.org/jessie/automake
> > > > > > > > 2. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+package/automake
> > > > > > > > 3. https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/automake
> > > > > > > > 4. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Update minimum required automake version to 1.13
Posted by Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io>.
Apparently, there is a way to get latest the autotools on CentOS 5 through
the same community that provides devtoolset:
https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/scls/praiskup/autotools/
If the tools are available, would there be any other objections to move to
the newer versions?
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Benjamin Mahler <be...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Well, CentOS 5 users don't have to upgrade gcc, they can use devtoolset-2.
> However, devtoolset-2 doesn't provide the newer automake FWICT.
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Marco Massenzio <ma...@mesosphere.io>
> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Cody Maloney <co...@mesosphere.io>
> wrote:
> >
> > > CentOS 5 and 6 don't come out of the box with a new enough version of
> GCC
> > > to compile Mesos. Already they need to upgrade that to compile Mesos. I
> > > don't see how adding another upgrade when they have to do GCC is overly
> > > onerous / should require lots of compatibility hacks to make
> unnecessary.
> > >
> >
> > +1
> > Different story for production servers; but build/dev machines are
> supposed
> > to use modern build/dev tools and environments (unless supporting an
> older
> > toolchain is a specific need for the project).
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:17 PM Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > It's not available for CentOS 5/6 or the previous debian stable. I
> > guess
> > > > since we still want to keep supporting the older distros, one
> > possibility
> > > > is to create a patch for configure.ac which is applied during
> > > ./bootstrap
> > > > after detecting the automake version. Is this an acceptable solution?
> > > >
> > > > If this works, then we can decide on whether we want to patch it for
> > > older
> > > > (< 1.13) or newer (>= 1.13) automake version. Is there a preference
> > > there?
> > > >
> > > > Kapil
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > we encountered a lot of issues in thrift between all the backwards
> > > > > incompatible changes automake had in 1.12 to 1.14 and trying to
> > support
> > > > all
> > > > > the default versions across different distros. due to this we are
> > > > switching
> > > > > to cmake as well
> > > > >
> > > > > -Jake
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Benjamin Mahler <
> > > > > benjamin.mahler@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > What about CentOS 5 and 6?
> > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS#End-of-support_schedule
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also, how does this interact with the effort to use CMake?
> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-898
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Kapil Arya <
> kapil@mesosphere.io>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > First off, I am not sure if we record the minimum required
> > version
> > > of
> > > > > > > automake/autoconf somewhere in the documentation.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Having said that, I want to propose to move to automake 1.13 in
> > > order
> > > > > to
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > able to use the "AM_EXTRA_RECURSIVE_TARGETS" macro which allows
> > us
> > > to
> > > > > > add a
> > > > > > > "test" target to just build the test and not run it. The issue
> is
> > > > > tracked
> > > > > > > at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2273 and the
> > > > > > corresponding
> > > > > > > RRs have received some ship-its.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > Kapil
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ==================
> > > > > > > Compatibility notes:
> > > > > > > Automake 1.13 came out in 2013 and here is the compatibility
> > status
> > > > for
> > > > > > > leading distros:
> > > > > > > * Debian: Since 8.0 [1].
> > > > > > > * Ubuntu: Since 13.10 [2].
> > > > > > > * Fedora: Since Fedora 20 [3].
> > > > > > > * Centos: Since 7.0 [4].
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. https://packages.debian.org/jessie/automake
> > > > > > > 2. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+package/automake
> > > > > > > 3. https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/automake
> > > > > > > 4. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Update minimum required automake version to 1.13
Posted by Benjamin Mahler <be...@gmail.com>.
Well, CentOS 5 users don't have to upgrade gcc, they can use devtoolset-2.
However, devtoolset-2 doesn't provide the newer automake FWICT.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Marco Massenzio <ma...@mesosphere.io>
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Cody Maloney <co...@mesosphere.io> wrote:
>
> > CentOS 5 and 6 don't come out of the box with a new enough version of GCC
> > to compile Mesos. Already they need to upgrade that to compile Mesos. I
> > don't see how adding another upgrade when they have to do GCC is overly
> > onerous / should require lots of compatibility hacks to make unnecessary.
> >
>
> +1
> Different story for production servers; but build/dev machines are supposed
> to use modern build/dev tools and environments (unless supporting an older
> toolchain is a specific need for the project).
>
>
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:17 PM Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io> wrote:
> >
> > > It's not available for CentOS 5/6 or the previous debian stable. I
> guess
> > > since we still want to keep supporting the older distros, one
> possibility
> > > is to create a patch for configure.ac which is applied during
> > ./bootstrap
> > > after detecting the automake version. Is this an acceptable solution?
> > >
> > > If this works, then we can decide on whether we want to patch it for
> > older
> > > (< 1.13) or newer (>= 1.13) automake version. Is there a preference
> > there?
> > >
> > > Kapil
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > we encountered a lot of issues in thrift between all the backwards
> > > > incompatible changes automake had in 1.12 to 1.14 and trying to
> support
> > > all
> > > > the default versions across different distros. due to this we are
> > > switching
> > > > to cmake as well
> > > >
> > > > -Jake
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Benjamin Mahler <
> > > > benjamin.mahler@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What about CentOS 5 and 6?
> > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS#End-of-support_schedule
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, how does this interact with the effort to use CMake?
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-898
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > First off, I am not sure if we record the minimum required
> version
> > of
> > > > > > automake/autoconf somewhere in the documentation.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Having said that, I want to propose to move to automake 1.13 in
> > order
> > > > to
> > > > > be
> > > > > > able to use the "AM_EXTRA_RECURSIVE_TARGETS" macro which allows
> us
> > to
> > > > > add a
> > > > > > "test" target to just build the test and not run it. The issue is
> > > > tracked
> > > > > > at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2273 and the
> > > > > corresponding
> > > > > > RRs have received some ship-its.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Kapil
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ==================
> > > > > > Compatibility notes:
> > > > > > Automake 1.13 came out in 2013 and here is the compatibility
> status
> > > for
> > > > > > leading distros:
> > > > > > * Debian: Since 8.0 [1].
> > > > > > * Ubuntu: Since 13.10 [2].
> > > > > > * Fedora: Since Fedora 20 [3].
> > > > > > * Centos: Since 7.0 [4].
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. https://packages.debian.org/jessie/automake
> > > > > > 2. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+package/automake
> > > > > > 3. https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/automake
> > > > > > 4. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Update minimum required automake version to 1.13
Posted by Marco Massenzio <ma...@mesosphere.io>.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Cody Maloney <co...@mesosphere.io> wrote:
> CentOS 5 and 6 don't come out of the box with a new enough version of GCC
> to compile Mesos. Already they need to upgrade that to compile Mesos. I
> don't see how adding another upgrade when they have to do GCC is overly
> onerous / should require lots of compatibility hacks to make unnecessary.
>
+1
Different story for production servers; but build/dev machines are supposed
to use modern build/dev tools and environments (unless supporting an older
toolchain is a specific need for the project).
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:17 PM Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io> wrote:
>
> > It's not available for CentOS 5/6 or the previous debian stable. I guess
> > since we still want to keep supporting the older distros, one possibility
> > is to create a patch for configure.ac which is applied during
> ./bootstrap
> > after detecting the automake version. Is this an acceptable solution?
> >
> > If this works, then we can decide on whether we want to patch it for
> older
> > (< 1.13) or newer (>= 1.13) automake version. Is there a preference
> there?
> >
> > Kapil
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > we encountered a lot of issues in thrift between all the backwards
> > > incompatible changes automake had in 1.12 to 1.14 and trying to support
> > all
> > > the default versions across different distros. due to this we are
> > switching
> > > to cmake as well
> > >
> > > -Jake
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Benjamin Mahler <
> > > benjamin.mahler@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > What about CentOS 5 and 6?
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS#End-of-support_schedule
> > > >
> > > > Also, how does this interact with the effort to use CMake?
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-898
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi All,
> > > > >
> > > > > First off, I am not sure if we record the minimum required version
> of
> > > > > automake/autoconf somewhere in the documentation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Having said that, I want to propose to move to automake 1.13 in
> order
> > > to
> > > > be
> > > > > able to use the "AM_EXTRA_RECURSIVE_TARGETS" macro which allows us
> to
> > > > add a
> > > > > "test" target to just build the test and not run it. The issue is
> > > tracked
> > > > > at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2273 and the
> > > > corresponding
> > > > > RRs have received some ship-its.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Kapil
> > > > >
> > > > > ==================
> > > > > Compatibility notes:
> > > > > Automake 1.13 came out in 2013 and here is the compatibility status
> > for
> > > > > leading distros:
> > > > > * Debian: Since 8.0 [1].
> > > > > * Ubuntu: Since 13.10 [2].
> > > > > * Fedora: Since Fedora 20 [3].
> > > > > * Centos: Since 7.0 [4].
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. https://packages.debian.org/jessie/automake
> > > > > 2. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+package/automake
> > > > > 3. https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/automake
> > > > > 4. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Update minimum required automake version to 1.13
Posted by Cody Maloney <co...@mesosphere.io>.
CentOS 5 and 6 don't come out of the box with a new enough version of GCC
to compile Mesos. Already they need to upgrade that to compile Mesos. I
don't see how adding another upgrade when they have to do GCC is overly
onerous / should require lots of compatibility hacks to make unnecessary.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:17 PM Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io> wrote:
> It's not available for CentOS 5/6 or the previous debian stable. I guess
> since we still want to keep supporting the older distros, one possibility
> is to create a patch for configure.ac which is applied during ./bootstrap
> after detecting the automake version. Is this an acceptable solution?
>
> If this works, then we can decide on whether we want to patch it for older
> (< 1.13) or newer (>= 1.13) automake version. Is there a preference there?
>
> Kapil
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > we encountered a lot of issues in thrift between all the backwards
> > incompatible changes automake had in 1.12 to 1.14 and trying to support
> all
> > the default versions across different distros. due to this we are
> switching
> > to cmake as well
> >
> > -Jake
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Benjamin Mahler <
> > benjamin.mahler@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > What about CentOS 5 and 6?
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS#End-of-support_schedule
> > >
> > > Also, how does this interact with the effort to use CMake?
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-898
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > First off, I am not sure if we record the minimum required version of
> > > > automake/autoconf somewhere in the documentation.
> > > >
> > > > Having said that, I want to propose to move to automake 1.13 in order
> > to
> > > be
> > > > able to use the "AM_EXTRA_RECURSIVE_TARGETS" macro which allows us to
> > > add a
> > > > "test" target to just build the test and not run it. The issue is
> > tracked
> > > > at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2273 and the
> > > corresponding
> > > > RRs have received some ship-its.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Kapil
> > > >
> > > > ==================
> > > > Compatibility notes:
> > > > Automake 1.13 came out in 2013 and here is the compatibility status
> for
> > > > leading distros:
> > > > * Debian: Since 8.0 [1].
> > > > * Ubuntu: Since 13.10 [2].
> > > > * Fedora: Since Fedora 20 [3].
> > > > * Centos: Since 7.0 [4].
> > > >
> > > > 1. https://packages.debian.org/jessie/automake
> > > > 2. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+package/automake
> > > > 3. https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/automake
> > > > 4. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Update minimum required automake version to 1.13
Posted by Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io>.
It's not available for CentOS 5/6 or the previous debian stable. I guess
since we still want to keep supporting the older distros, one possibility
is to create a patch for configure.ac which is applied during ./bootstrap
after detecting the automake version. Is this an acceptable solution?
If this works, then we can decide on whether we want to patch it for older
(< 1.13) or newer (>= 1.13) automake version. Is there a preference there?
Kapil
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org> wrote:
> we encountered a lot of issues in thrift between all the backwards
> incompatible changes automake had in 1.12 to 1.14 and trying to support all
> the default versions across different distros. due to this we are switching
> to cmake as well
>
> -Jake
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Benjamin Mahler <
> benjamin.mahler@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > What about CentOS 5 and 6?
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS#End-of-support_schedule
> >
> > Also, how does this interact with the effort to use CMake?
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-898
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > First off, I am not sure if we record the minimum required version of
> > > automake/autoconf somewhere in the documentation.
> > >
> > > Having said that, I want to propose to move to automake 1.13 in order
> to
> > be
> > > able to use the "AM_EXTRA_RECURSIVE_TARGETS" macro which allows us to
> > add a
> > > "test" target to just build the test and not run it. The issue is
> tracked
> > > at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2273 and the
> > corresponding
> > > RRs have received some ship-its.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Kapil
> > >
> > > ==================
> > > Compatibility notes:
> > > Automake 1.13 came out in 2013 and here is the compatibility status for
> > > leading distros:
> > > * Debian: Since 8.0 [1].
> > > * Ubuntu: Since 13.10 [2].
> > > * Fedora: Since Fedora 20 [3].
> > > * Centos: Since 7.0 [4].
> > >
> > > 1. https://packages.debian.org/jessie/automake
> > > 2. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+package/automake
> > > 3. https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/automake
> > > 4. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/
> > >
> >
>
Re: Update minimum required automake version to 1.13
Posted by Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>.
we encountered a lot of issues in thrift between all the backwards
incompatible changes automake had in 1.12 to 1.14 and trying to support all
the default versions across different distros. due to this we are switching
to cmake as well
-Jake
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Benjamin Mahler <be...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> What about CentOS 5 and 6?
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS#End-of-support_schedule
>
> Also, how does this interact with the effort to use CMake?
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-898
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > First off, I am not sure if we record the minimum required version of
> > automake/autoconf somewhere in the documentation.
> >
> > Having said that, I want to propose to move to automake 1.13 in order to
> be
> > able to use the "AM_EXTRA_RECURSIVE_TARGETS" macro which allows us to
> add a
> > "test" target to just build the test and not run it. The issue is tracked
> > at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2273 and the
> corresponding
> > RRs have received some ship-its.
> >
> > Best,
> > Kapil
> >
> > ==================
> > Compatibility notes:
> > Automake 1.13 came out in 2013 and here is the compatibility status for
> > leading distros:
> > * Debian: Since 8.0 [1].
> > * Ubuntu: Since 13.10 [2].
> > * Fedora: Since Fedora 20 [3].
> > * Centos: Since 7.0 [4].
> >
> > 1. https://packages.debian.org/jessie/automake
> > 2. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+package/automake
> > 3. https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/automake
> > 4. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/
> >
>
Re: Update minimum required automake version to 1.13
Posted by Benjamin Mahler <be...@gmail.com>.
What about CentOS 5 and 6?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS#End-of-support_schedule
Also, how does this interact with the effort to use CMake?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-898
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> First off, I am not sure if we record the minimum required version of
> automake/autoconf somewhere in the documentation.
>
> Having said that, I want to propose to move to automake 1.13 in order to be
> able to use the "AM_EXTRA_RECURSIVE_TARGETS" macro which allows us to add a
> "test" target to just build the test and not run it. The issue is tracked
> at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2273 and the corresponding
> RRs have received some ship-its.
>
> Best,
> Kapil
>
> ==================
> Compatibility notes:
> Automake 1.13 came out in 2013 and here is the compatibility status for
> leading distros:
> * Debian: Since 8.0 [1].
> * Ubuntu: Since 13.10 [2].
> * Fedora: Since Fedora 20 [3].
> * Centos: Since 7.0 [4].
>
> 1. https://packages.debian.org/jessie/automake
> 2. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+package/automake
> 3. https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/automake
> 4. http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/
>