On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 13:24:16 +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Tue, 2016-02-09 at 12:07 +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote: > > Dear list, > > > > I've noticed a failed build on CentOS-6 after some commits. Problem was > > that old gcc is not wise enough and produces a false positive. I've > > proposed a patch for that [1] but honestly, neither am I - like Peter - > > very fond of this approach. We should not try to fix a good code because > > of some spurious warnings. Moreover if they happen on a system that is > > considered stable and thus nobody should run recent libvirt on it. > > > > In RHEL-6/CentOS-6 there's libvirt-0.10.2 which is 3.5 years old now. > > > > I'm starting this thread so that the decision and discussion is clear > > and not buried under discussion to the patch. > > > > If we happen to stop caring we probably should stop our CentOS-6 build > > in jenkins too [2]. > > My two Czech crowns: as far as upstream development goes, we should > really only focus on supporting current OSs (eg. RHEL 7, Debian 8, > Ubuntu 14.04, FreeBSD 10.2). > > Older OSs will be sticking to an old version of libvirt anyway, and > the respective vendors will take care of backporting security fixes. > > This transitively applies to QEMU as well - once we drop support > for CentOS 6 we should also drop support for any QEMU version that > doesn't support CentOS 6. TO be honest, I would be thrilled to see any support for QEMU < 1.2.0 going away, since we force QMP probing on anything newer and we could just drop all -help parsing and most of HMP support (except for a few commands which don't have QMP equivalents). QEMU 1.2.0 is tag v1.2.0 Tagger: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@xxxxxxxxxx> TaggerDate: Wed Sep 5 07:50:34 2012 -0500 which means 3.5 years ago. Jirka -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list