Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55765) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f93rD-0008Iw-B1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Apr 2018 03:19:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f93r8-0000QH-Bl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Apr 2018 03:19:51 -0400 From: Markus Armbruster References: <20180418123838.3511-1-olaf@aepfle.de> <20180418144538.4aa2f492.cohuck@redhat.com> <20180418125545.GN27579@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 09:19:28 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20180418125545.GN27579@redhat.com> ("Daniel P. =?utf-8?Q?Ber?= =?utf-8?Q?rang=C3=A9=22's?= message of "Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:55:45 +0100") Message-ID: <87sh7rvf27.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1] configure: require glib-2.24 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Daniel P. =?utf-8?Q?Berrang=C3=A9?=" Cc: Cornelia Huck , Peter Maydell , Olaf Hering , Fam Zheng , qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-?= =?utf-8?Q?Daud=C3=A9?= , "open list:All patches CC here" , Gerd Hoffmann , Paolo Bonzini Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 writes: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 02:45:38PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > >> Are we ready to give up support for whatever distro is still on 2.22? >> (If yes, can we bump to an even newer glib version?) Or should we >> rather solve this by adding a g_realloc_n implementation for that case? > > Version 2.22 was released in Sep 2009, so coming up for 9 years old now. > > At some point we should to declare that platforms shipping >=3D NNN year > old versions of software are not a desirable target for QEMU. What is > our desired NNN value - 9 years feels awfully long to me. > > For libvirt we recently decided to become more aggressive[1] in culling o= ld > distros as supportable targets, declaring we'll only support non-EOL > distros (for short life distros), or for long life distros (RHEL, LTS, et= c) > the most recent version, and the recent minus-1 for 2 years overlap. > > Should we formalize similar guidelines for QEMU to give developers a > guide for when it is reasonable to increase the min required version of > any 3rd party library ? glib is a mandatory dep, but we've countless > other optional libraries we might wish to increase min versions for too, > and no guide on when it is reasonable todo so. Yes, please. > > Regards, > Daniel > > [1] https://libvirt.org/platforms.html This policy looks sensible to me