FWIW I sent patches to libvir-list for the power64 macro change and the aarch64 change. On 07/15/2014 07:29 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 07/15/2014 04:29 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: >>> Doing an out-of-the-box build on RHEL 5 is the oldest configuration >>> still actively (if marginally) supported, ideally for as long as RHEL 5 >>> remains a live platform (several more years to go). We have build-bots >>> that ensure that we can build on RHEL 5, although I'm not sure if those >>> buildbots are exercising 'make rpm' to test the older parts of the spec >>> file. Historically, RHEL 5.10 is based off of libvirt-0.8.2, and that >>> was the release in use during Fedora 13. So it's _definitely_ worth >>> culling any conditionals older than F13; but stuff between F13 and F18 >>> might be shared with RHEL 5, and therefore more effort to cull the >>> Fedora side while still leaving the RHEL side intact. >> >> Yes, and you'll note in my change that I didn't change anything that >> affected EL based releases. In terms of F-13 style tags you should be >> capturing that in appropriate and equivalent EL tags to ensure you get >> right and consistent conditionals for the appropriate release as >> opposed to relying on a translation as you have EL conditionals there >> already.... why mix the two. > > Not sure I follow you here; a patch may be worth more than words (and > I'm planning on posting a tentative patch soon). > >>> Anyone else on the libvirt list have an opinion on how far back we can >>> clean without annoying people that are slow on the upgrade to modern Fedora? >> >> You have known users that are actively upgrading to the latest libvirt >> and no other components on old versions of Fedora? > > I don't honestly know - which is why I'm asking the list if anyone > reading here would care if we pruned F18 code. > -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list