<div dir="ltr">It sounds like there are no objections to jumping to Windows 7 as the baseline. Is it worth getting a note added to the next LLVM weekly to give the potential change a bit of a wider viewership before going ahead with it or are we in a position to just do this now? If so, what are the actual mechanics of the change, and who'd like to do it?<div>Thanks!</div><div>-Greg</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 14 July 2015 at 06:55, NAKAMURA Takumi <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:geek4civic@gmail.com" target="_blank">geek4civic@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir="ltr">+1. We may focus Windows 7, aka NT6.1, as the baseline.<br></p>
<p dir="ltr">2015年7月14日(火) 7:48 Aaron Ballman <<a href="mailto:aaron@aaronballman.com" target="_blank">aaron@aaronballman.com</a>>:</p><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">
<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Reid Kleckner <<a href="mailto:rnk@google.com" target="_blank">rnk@google.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Nobody objected to raising the bar, so I think we can go ahead and do this.<br>
> Keeping the XP support until 3.7 ships seems reasonable as it's less<br>
> disruptive.<br>
<br>
Agreed.<br>
<br>
> Should we consider bypassing Vista and jumping to 7 as the lowest supported<br>
> Windows version as David suggested? I think we should document 7 as the<br>
> recommended baseline. After we start using some of the newer APIs, we can<br>
> see if users complain and evaluate the burden of maintaining Vista support<br>
> at that time.<br>
<br>
I think it's reasonable to switch to Windows 7 at this point. Vista's<br>
mainstream support ended in 2012 and only has extended support until<br>
2017, so it's sunsetting already.<br>
<br>
~Aaron<br>
<br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Greg Bedwell <<a href="mailto:gregbedwell@gmail.com" target="_blank">gregbedwell@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Hi all,<br>
>><br>
>> It looks like this conversation stalled. I have a local patch that I'd<br>
>> like to send upstream (automatically generating Windows crash dumps on<br>
>> clang/LLVM crashes) that makes use of a Windows API function that requires<br>
>> _WIN32_WINNT set to 0x0600 at minimum so I'd like to restart the<br>
>> conversation!<br>
>><br>
>> As there have so far been no objections that I've seen and we're branching<br>
>> imminently, it feels like a perfect time to make this change as soon as the<br>
>> release branch is taken, and adding a release note for 3.7 to the effect of<br>
>> it being the final version supporting XP. I don't think there's been a<br>
>> clear conclusion on what we should raise it to though.<br>
>><br>
>> Any thoughts on this?<br>
>><br>
>> Thanks,<br>
>> -Greg<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On 31 October 2014 at 16:30, Robinson, Paul<br>
>> <<a href="mailto:Paul_Robinson@playstation.sony.com" target="_blank">Paul_Robinson@playstation.sony.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> We formally support our toolchain only on Windows 7 onward, so it's okay<br>
>>> with us.<br>
>>><br>
>>> (Please make sure this goes in the release notes when you start doing<br>
>>> something not supported in XP and/or Vista.)<br>
>>><br>
>>> --paulr<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> From: <a href="mailto:llvmdev-bounces@cs.uiuc.edu" target="_blank">llvmdev-bounces@cs.uiuc.edu</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:llvmdev-bounces@cs.uiuc.edu" target="_blank">llvmdev-bounces@cs.uiuc.edu</a>] On<br>
>>> Behalf Of Jim Rowan<br>
>>> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 1:05 PM<br>
>>> To: Reid Kleckner<br>
>>> Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List<br>
>>> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] RFC: Drop support running LLVM on Windows XP<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> +1<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> On Oct 30, 2014, at 3:29 PM, Reid Kleckner wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> I'd like to raise our baseline Windows system requirements to Vista,<br>
>>> dropping support for running LLVM on Windows XP. Microsoft dropped support<br>
>>> for XP half a year ago in April 2014.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Our current status is that we require VS 2012 to build LLVM, and VS 2012<br>
>>> only runs on Vista+, but it has the ability produce binaries that run on XP.<br>
>>> During the C++11-pocalypse, users expressed interest in keeping this<br>
>>> working. I'm proposing that we drop support for this.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Vista introduced a lot of handy system APIs that could significantly<br>
>>> simplify LLVM's Support library. For example, I'd really like to use the<br>
>>> blessed one-time initialization routines in this CL:<br>
>>><br>
>>> <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__reviews.llvm.org_D5922&d=AwMFaQ&c=8hUWFZcy2Z-Za5rBPlktOQ&r=Mfk2qtn1LTDThVkh6-oGglNfMADXfJdty4_bhmuhMHA&m=-tDq50Av2cwiwvdyutPNJ7PbVFbShIFUapOCDFaAkT4&s=4isCviyssVd55OcjxwYnsykxYAMXGpb14gf4awJu1ec&e=" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://reviews.llvm.org/D5922</a><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Vista also introduced a bunch of condition variable APIs that I know less<br>
>>> about, but that's another reason we might want to raise our base requirement<br>
>>> as people look into parallel LTO and codegen. It also seems likely that we<br>
>>> will want to use some of the new C++11 library features that are only<br>
>>> present in newer CRTs, which don't run on XP.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Please respond if you have any objections. If there are no strong<br>
>>> objections, I think we can start using Vista+ APIs in a week or so. We can<br>
>>> still change our minds and revert stuff before the release if users feel<br>
>>> this is too short notice.<br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu" target="_blank">LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu</a> <a href="http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev</a><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted<br>
>>> by the Linux Foundation<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu" target="_blank">LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu</a> <a href="http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev</a><br>
>>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu" target="_blank">LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu</a> <a href="http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev</a><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu" target="_blank">LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu</a> <a href="http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu">LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu</a> <a href="http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>