On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 10:54 AM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > > Hello Rainer, > > On Fri, 2024-05-10 at 10:20 +0200, Rainer Orth wrote: > > > > Support for Solaris 11.3 had already been obsoleted in GCC 13. However, > > > > since the only Solaris system in the cfarm was running 11.3, I've kept > > > > it in tree until now when both Solaris 11.4/SPARC and x86 systems have > > > > been added. > > > > > > > > This patch actually removes the Solaris 11.3 support. > > > > > > I'm not sure I like this change since Solaris 11.3 is the last version of > > > Solaris supported by a large number of SPARC systems. > > > > > > Oracle unfortunately raised the hardware baseline with Solaris 11.4 such > > > that every system older than the SPARC T4 is no longer supported by 11.4 > > > while 11.3 still runs perfectly fine on these machines. > > > > I wonder why you didn't raise your concerns 1 1/2 years ago when I > > announced the obsoletion of Solaris 11.3 support? > > Because I wasn't subscribed to gcc-patches and I'm also only subscribed now > without receiving messages due to the large message volume on this list.
https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-13/changes.html > The problem with announcements on developer mailing lists is usually that they > usually don't reach any users. I was made aware of this change only when I > checked about the recent changes to GCC Git. Where do you expect such announcement then? Richard. > > > While Oracle does no longer provide feature updates to Solaris 11.3, there > > > is still LTSS security support so that users still receive security > > > updates > > > so that their systems are continued to be protected against > > > vulnerabilities. > > > > The Solaris 11.3 ESUs (Extended Support Updates) are available at a > > premium only, and just contain the bare minimum of security updates, > > often 6 to 9 month in between. > > That's not an argument for throwing away hardware that still works perfectly > fine and that still has some users. > > > > I think Solaris 11.3 support should be kept since the resulting code > > > removal > > > is not that large that it would justify dropping support for such a large > > > userbase. > > > > Do you have any indication on the size of the userbase? I seriously > > doubt it's large beyond some hobbyists that keep the old hardware > > running. > > I don't have the exact numbers, no. But I know there are many users out there > with pre-11.4 hardware that they still use. As you may know, there are no > 11.4 SPARC desktop systems and most 11.4-capable hardware is usually very > expensive. > > > You also seem to forget that my GCC (and LLVM) Solaris support work is > > purely voluntary, done in my spare time. > > Not sure what makes you think so. I'm perfectly aware of the fact that lots of > people do this work in their spare time as this applies to me as well. > > I'm not getting paid for my Debian work, my kernel maintenance and all the > other > stuff that I'm doing either. That doesn't mean users are not allowed to ask me > questions or send me comments about my work. > > > Keeping Solaris 11.3 support working would be much more than restoring > > the removal patch: > > > > * For each and every of my Solaris patches, I'd have to investigate if > > it works on 11.3 or needs adjustments and workarounds. > > > > * I'd also need to regularly test the result to keep things working. > > > > I honestly don't have the time or the energy to do this, nor the > > hardware required for testing Besides, I have too much on my plate > > already, and rather spend it on more beneficial work. > > Does Solaris support in GCC really change that often that the necessary tests > cannot be run by volunteers? I'd be happy to test changes for Solaris 11.3 > which can be installed inside an LDOM. > > > Above all, I always wonder why people insist on running ancient hardware > > with an almost-unsupported OS, but require a bleeding edge version of > > GCC. What's wrong with continuing to use GCC 13 (or even 14, although I > > haven't tested that on Solaris 11.3) instead? > > You could also ask why people use operating systems other than Linux and > architectures other than x86_64. I don't think you will get a satisfactory > answer to that question. > > > > Removing Solaris 11.3 support might make sense in the future when SPARC > > > support in Illumos has matured enough that people can switch over their > > > machines. > > > > As has been noted, SPARC is on its way out for Illumos. > > Which makes my point to keep Solaris 11.3 support even more valid. > > Adrian > > -- > .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > : :' : Debian Developer > `. `' Physicist > `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913