From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56144) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVO9z-000448-HQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 13:41:40 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVO9v-0003jh-2i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 13:41:39 -0400 Received: from mail-la0-f46.google.com ([209.85.215.46]:36596) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVO9u-0003iE-S5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 13:41:35 -0400 Received: by labgd6 with SMTP id gd6so3429998lab.3 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:41:34 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1426009047-25139-1-git-send-email-jsnow@redhat.com> References: <1426009047-25139-1-git-send-email-jsnow@redhat.com> From: Peter Maydell Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 17:41:11 +0000 Message-ID: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134188c6d33560510f2a9c5 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] configure: bump glib version to 2.16 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: John Snow Cc: Paolo Bonzini , mjt@tlks.msk.ru, QEMU Developers --001a1134188c6d33560510f2a9c5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 10 March 2015 at 17:37, John Snow wrote: > Our qtest suite relies on many functions available only in glib 2.16+. > Even though our base QEMU binary may only require 2.12+, it is confusing > to have two separate version requirements. > > Thus, this is an attempt to re-establish a sane baseline for the entire > project at 2.16+. > Why 2.16 rather than the 2.22 that we seem to have converged on in discussions on-list? -- PMM --001a1134188c6d33560510f2a9c5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On 10 March 2015 at 17:37, John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> w= rote:
Our qtest suite relies on many func= tions available only in glib 2.16+.
Even though our base QEMU binary may only require 2.12+, it is confusing to have two separate version requirements.

Thus, this is an attempt to re-establish a sane baseline for the entire
project at 2.16+.


Why 2.16 rather t= han the 2.22 that we seem to have converged
on in discussions= on-list?

-- PMM

--001a1134188c6d33560510f2a9c5--