(original) (raw)

+1\. We may focus Windows 7, aka NT6.1, as the baseline.

2015年7月14日(火) 7:48 Aaron Ballman <aaron@aaronballman.com>:

On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk@google.com> wrote:
\> Nobody objected to raising the bar, so I think we can go ahead and do this.
\> Keeping the XP support until 3.7 ships seems reasonable as it's less
\> disruptive.

Agreed.

\> Should we consider bypassing Vista and jumping to 7 as the lowest supported
\> Windows version as David suggested? I think we should document 7 as the
\> recommended baseline. After we start using some of the newer APIs, we can
\> see if users complain and evaluate the burden of maintaining Vista support
\> at that time.

I think it's reasonable to switch to Windows 7 at this point. Vista's
mainstream support ended in 2012 and only has extended support until
2017, so it's sunsetting already.

\~Aaron

\>
\> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Greg Bedwell <gregbedwell@gmail.com> wrote:
\>>
\>> Hi all,
\>>
\>> It looks like this conversation stalled. I have a local patch that I'd
\>> like to send upstream (automatically generating Windows crash dumps on
\>> clang/LLVM crashes) that makes use of a Windows API function that requires
\>> \_WIN32\_WINNT set to 0x0600 at minimum so I'd like to restart the
\>> conversation!
\>>
\>> As there have so far been no objections that I've seen and we're branching
\>> imminently, it feels like a perfect time to make this change as soon as the
\>> release branch is taken, and adding a release note for 3.7 to the effect of
\>> it being the final version supporting XP. I don't think there's been a
\>> clear conclusion on what we should raise it to though.
\>>
\>> Any thoughts on this?
\>>
\>> Thanks,
\>> -Greg
\>>
\>>
\>> On 31 October 2014 at 16:30, Robinson, Paul
\>> <Paul\_Robinson@playstation.sony.com> wrote:
\>>>
\>>> We formally support our toolchain only on Windows 7 onward, so it's okay
\>>> with us.
\>>>
\>>> (Please make sure this goes in the release notes when you start doing
\>>> something not supported in XP and/or Vista.)
\>>>
\>>> --paulr
\>>>
\>>>
\>>>
\>>> From: llvmdev-bounces@cs.uiuc.edu \[mailto:llvmdev-bounces@cs.uiuc.edu\] On
\>>> Behalf Of Jim Rowan
\>>> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 1:05 PM
\>>> To: Reid Kleckner
\>>> Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List
\>>> Subject: Re: \[LLVMdev\] RFC: Drop support running LLVM on Windows XP
\>>>
\>>>
\>>>
\>>> +1
\>>>
\>>>
\>>>
\>>> On Oct 30, 2014, at 3:29 PM, Reid Kleckner wrote:
\>>>
\>>>
\>>>
\>>> I'd like to raise our baseline Windows system requirements to Vista,
\>>> dropping support for running LLVM on Windows XP. Microsoft dropped support
\>>> for XP half a year ago in April 2014.
\>>>
\>>>
\>>>
\>>> Our current status is that we require VS 2012 to build LLVM, and VS 2012
\>>> only runs on Vista+, but it has the ability produce binaries that run on XP.
\>>> During the C++11-pocalypse, users expressed interest in keeping this
\>>> working. I'm proposing that we drop support for this.
\>>>
\>>>
\>>>
\>>> Vista introduced a lot of handy system APIs that could significantly
\>>> simplify LLVM's Support library. For example, I'd really like to use the
\>>> blessed one-time initialization routines in this CL:
\>>>
\>>> http://reviews.llvm.org/D5922
\>>>
\>>>
\>>>
\>>> Vista also introduced a bunch of condition variable APIs that I know less
\>>> about, but that's another reason we might want to raise our base requirement
\>>> as people look into parallel LTO and codegen. It also seems likely that we
\>>> will want to use some of the new C++11 library features that are only
\>>> present in newer CRTs, which don't run on XP.
\>>>
\>>>
\>>>
\>>> Please respond if you have any objections. If there are no strong
\>>> objections, I think we can start using Vista+ APIs in a week or so. We can
\>>> still change our minds and revert stuff before the release if users feel
\>>> this is too short notice.
\>>>
\>>> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
\>>> LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
\>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
\>>>
\>>>
\>>>
\>>>
\>>> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted
\>>> by the Linux Foundation
\>>>
\>>>
\>>>
\>>>
\>>> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
\>>> LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
\>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
\>>>
\>>
\>
\>
\> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\> LLVM Developers mailing list
\> LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
\> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
\>
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
LLVM Developers mailing list
LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
LLVM Developers mailing list
LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev