X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4D41D1A1.8040607@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 13:12:17 -0700 From: Eric Blake User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101209 Fedora/3.1.7-0.35.b3pre.fc14 Lightning/1.0b3pre Mnenhy/0.8.3 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: cygwin patches for gnulib relocation code [Was: Re: Bug in libiconv?] References: <20110124154158 DOT GA15279 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4D3E3EF6 DOT 7010501 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> <4D40E1EB DOT 8030401 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> <20110127122015 DOT GA25883 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4D419B91 DOT 7090005 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> <20110127170815 DOT GR28470 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4D41BB0E DOT 7020903 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> In-Reply-To: <4D41BB0E.7020903@cwilson.fastmail.fm> OpenPGP: url=http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig9FFF1BDDE21ACE724B7935A1" X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com --------------enig9FFF1BDDE21ACE724B7935A1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 01/27/2011 11:35 AM, Charles Wilson wrote: > On 1/27/2011 12:08 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> Cygwin Versions prior to 1.7.7 are not support anyway. >=20 > This is merely semantics. You're saying that *the cygwin project* does > not support older cygwins. However, that doesn't mean *other projects* > have the same policy -- see, for instance, upstream git. >=20 >> The changes >> should work with versions at least back to 1.7.2 and I don't care the >> least for older versions. There's no reason to clutter the code to >> support old, unsupported Cygwin versions. There are existing, older >> builds of libiconv available for them. >=20 > But I'm not (really) talking about libiconv. I'm talking about a > proposed patch for gnulib -- which is a *source based repository* meant > to be imported *as source* into other projects, so there are no "old > builds" of gnulib. So, it's a policy question for the gnulib > maintainers: what is their "too old; we don't care" horizon for cygwin? > Eric (Blake), you're active on the gnulib list. Care to comment? Answering with my gnulib maintainer hat on (and yes, I am one of the core gnulib maintainers) - Bruno Haible likes to keep cygwin 1.5 supported in gnulib, and probably will do until at least 3 years after cygwin 1.7 was first released, since it is still relatively easy to install cygwin 1.5 alongside a modern cygwin and test patches against both versions. But Bruno also tends to be the strongest advocate for back-compatibility; my feel is that most other active maintainers, myself included, are concerned with what builds now, but not worrying about porting to an old distro if upgrading to a newer version of the same distro achieves the same goal. Then again, all this progreloc stuff that triggered this conversation in the first place is Bruno's domain, so I can pretty much guess the answer - he'll want to support as much as possible, if such support is easy to do. Put another way: gnulib will support as many versions of easily maintainable platforms as possible. For closed solutions, this means as long as the vendor will also support it (for example, SunOS 4 is no longer a viable target, since Sun dropped support for the OS before they even merged into Oracle), and Solaris 8 is borderline (Oracle doesn't support it, but it's generally not too hard to support) - there, we have no control over when the vendor puts out a new version, so we have to maintain the workaround as long as the vendor maintains the old version. For Linux, the window has been back to the oldest shipping enterprise-level distro (for example, CentOS 5 is a viable porting target, which puts the window at about 3-5 years for glibc/kernel workarounds in gnulib). But in general, for open platforms (Linux, Cygwin, BSD), the thought has been that for very difficult bugs, where a portability workaround is more of a maintenance burden than just fixing the bug upstream, it is better off filing a bug report with the upstream distro in parallel with the gnulib workaround, so that the workaround can be retired when the old distros are out of use. So, answering with my cygwin contributor hat on - it doesn't matter if we've fixed the bug for cygwin 1.7.8, gnulib will probably want a solution that works with cygwin 1.7.7 for about the next 3-year window, as well as a solution for cygwin 1.5. But that's gnulib's problem, not cygwin's - don't let it stop us from making progress here. --=20 Eric Blake eblake AT redhat DOT com +1-801-349-2682 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org --------------enig9FFF1BDDE21ACE724B7935A1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJNQdGiAAoJEKeha0olJ0NqKdsH/0rfWnW8a69VJ+RutzLIZMC2 90NP7yuQaYFive17SwAGczpa4YQMyIGoHzl0pLrtSZouwa/OomOd/pJEcBb1ZBbo wMnuojlctyo/Kwv7CtlQ78/eJYvARHWK97poahmwRiKIPo0wNzOKX3b+nmzKMrO2 /Jderq9h8WvhNwC4p4mepk6rNzHCpK8fy3G9FK50734GLGZtgyrhfHLDRX//h6kD d8OV9kivdXhFxGv8JZ/czY/P97durJQcwfBCD6jymM+GToykn6MEecT92Kal/0v2 bOx1ctfFRIOsAZN+eBAK4d60sP/3ZmEmgvTdU+lVJjJ5o6B1otl/W2bTkjoK02Q= =kYAU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig9FFF1BDDE21ACE724B7935A1--