On 19 December 2016 at 06:45, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Ivan Zhakov <i...@visualsvn.com> wrote: >> >> On 17 December 2016 at 21:47, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> >> wrote: >> >> > As 1.6 is unreleased, whatever goes in trunk that does -not- break >> > backwards >> > binary compat can go right into 1.6 as well. >> > >> The problem that currently it's very hard to find minimum Windows >> version that support particural API, because MSDN lists Windows XP as >> minimum version for almost all APIs. Even for function that existed in >> Windows 4.0. See GetProcAddress() for example [1] >> >> As far I understand minimum supported Windows for APR 1.6.x is Windows >> 95. Is it correct? Anyway I don't have even Windows NT 4.0 test >> environment. Even more: Windows 95, 98, NT 4.0 and 2000 is cannot be >> legally downloaded due Java settlement [2]. >> >> [1] >> https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms683212(v=vs.85).aspx >> [2] https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/ff723773.aspx > > > Because Microsoft no longer issues security patches to NT 4 or Win9x > or even Windows 2000 or 2003 and now - even XP, the httpd project's > perspective is that connecting these machines to the internet is very > unwise, and no further httpd support should be directed to those OS > revisions. This eliminates the ANSI/8-bit-only APIs, and lets us put all > attention and effort and FooFunctionW() wide-char equivalents. > Agree. Btw VisualSVN Server dropped support for Windows older than Vista/Server 2008 in September 2014.
> That's the perspective looking from a server project. APR was never > constrained to only server applications. There might be other APR > consumers who take a different perspective on antique OS support. > Subversion currently supports Windows 2000+. There were suggestion to drop Windows 2000 [1], but no decision was made. TortoiseSVN minimum supported OS is Windows Vista. I don't about other projects using APR. > From the APR 2.0 perspective I don't mind throwing these all out > from our forward-looking efforts. I suppose we can continue to not > break these older OS's on the 1.x maintenance branch, since it > generally isn't a lot of effort to offer a stub function where the > entry point is not present. > I'm big +1 (non-binding) to make Windows Vista/Server 2008 minimum supported Windows for APR 2.0. In my opinion it would simplify development and testing of APR. In this case we can use native implemention read-write lock, APIs like GetFileInformationByHandleEx()/SetFileInformationByHandleEx() etc. But maybe requiring Windows Vista for APR 2.0 is too radical change. What do you think about Windows CE support for APR 2.0? Can we drop it too? > FWIW, Windows 7 introduced the DisconnectSocket() API, which > was completely missing when we first designed the apr sockets > API, so we played games with TransmitFile instead to disconnect > and save a recyclable socket upon completion. Seems like we > could simplify this now that the right OS API exists. I don't see DisconnectSocket() API. Do you mean DisconnectEx() [2] ? DisconnectEx API is available from Windows Vista, not Windows 7 though. [1] https://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2016-08/0013.shtml [2] https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms737757 -- Ivan Zhakov
