From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37430) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XTw1N-0007lB-9L for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 12:54:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XTw1G-0008CM-Tk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 12:54:29 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4590) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XTw1G-0008BE-MI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 12:54:22 -0400 Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 19:57:39 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20140916165739.GD8628@redhat.com> References: <1410882204-9836-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <54186401.9040705@redhat.com> <54186670.1010604@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] tests: use g_test_trap_fork for glib between 2.16 and 2.38 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Paolo Bonzini , QEMU Developers , Eduardo Habkost On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 09:45:03AM -0700, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 16 September 2014 09:33, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > Il 16/09/2014 18:28, Peter Maydell ha scritto: > >>> > Though you would just drop support for "make check" on RHEL5. Even > >>> > "make -k check" would roughly work. > >> Can't we just put in the makefile and configure magic to skip > >> the test if the glib version is too old for it? > > > > Yes, that's what Michael did (minus the magic to use the older > > fork-based code). But is it really worthwhile to support RHEL5? We > > made glib mandatory in 2011 (around RHEL6.2), and that broke RHEL4. By > > the time the next QEMU release is ready RHEL7.1 should be out, give or > > take a month or so. > > I care because in the EDA tools space things move very slowly > and so RHEL5 is still fairly commonplace. Obviously at some > point we're going to end up dropping support, but "one test > case won't build" seems like a pretty trivial reason to drop > it to me. > > -- PMM Could you pls tell me whether my patch works, in your testing? My box which had such an old glib seems to be dead.