> Does it mean that the binaries we distribute should work on that?

I have been maintaining XCB plugin and the bundled xkbcommon and xcb 3rd party 
sources based on the assumption that an answer to this question is - yes.


________________________________
From: Development <[email protected]> on behalf of Tony 
Sarajärvi <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 1:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Development] A monologue about platforms in the Qt world

Hi all!

I'd like to open up a discussion about the platforms we "support".  This is 
like listening to a broken record, but once again it’s about adding or removing 
platforms in the CI, what’s supported and what we do packages with. But, this 
time I'm going to approach you a bit differently. Instead of simple questions, 
I'm going to bombard you with boring details. You need to know what exactly it 
is we are asking you about after all ;)


What's a  supported platform?
---
It means that The Qt Company gives you support if you stumble upon a problem 
with that distro and the Qt release promised to work on that. But what’s 
unclear is what it actually means that Qt should work on that platform. Does it 
mean that the binaries we distribute should work on that? Or does it mean that 
Qt builds on it if you take the sources and compile them yourself? This is one 
of the most asked questions we’ve had here. A good example is openSUSE 42.3 
where examples don’t compile if you take our binary release and try to work 
with that. But if you would compile Qt on that distro, then it would work. (see 
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTQAINFRA-2780 if you want to know the 
details). What do you think it means? Is one or the other answers wrong here?


What a platform in the CI?
---
Ok this one is pretty clear. A platform in the CI is a platform we see fit to 
be tested for a specific branch. The important thing here is to realize that 
this is not the same thing as us supporting something. For obvious reasons it 
would be great if everything we supported was tested here, but because of the 
vast amount of combinations, we can't do that. We simply try to cover the most 
common cases here. And that's always up for debate! If you see that something 
is worth testing in the CI, create a ticket about it and justify why your 
configuration should be in there. This doesn't just mean adding platforms or 
compilers. It also means configurations like -no-gui or building examples for 
Android or something.


What's a packaging configuration and why don't Linux binaries work as promised?
---
Some configurations in the CI are used to actually create the binaries which we 
deliver as Qt binaries via the installer. They can be recognized by the 
"Packaging" keyword in the following files:
https://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qt5.git/tree/coin/platform_configs/default.txt
https://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qt5.git/tree/coin/platform_configs/qt5.txt
For most platforms this makes a lot of sense and they don't cause problems 
anywhere, but our Linux binaries are a different thing entirely. Where Windows 
and macOS binaries work here and there, Linux distros tend to be more strict to 
what works and where. The library dependencies make things not work backwards 
as well as on Windows and macOS. Which brings us to the problem mentioned 
earlier at supported platforms. Binaries created with RHEL 7.4 don't tend to 
work on openSUSE 42.3, but they do compile.

When selecting this operating system which we created packages with, we tend to 
select a reasonable new one, most preferably a stable one, with a good set of 
old libraries so that the backwards compatibility is good. Take RHEL 7 for 
example. RHEL 7.0 was release in June 2014. In July 2017 we got the 7.4 update 
which we began using. RHEL 7.4 is still compatible with 7.0, which means that 
our binaries are created with a new distro that creates binaries compatible 
with distros created in 2014. At least sort of.

But the distro we use, isn't always the out-of-the-box distro. When we used 
RHEL 6.6 for example, we replaced the bluez (for Bluetooth) libraries with own 
ones so that Qt binaries would have the features enabled that were wished. That 
actually means that we didn't use RHEL 6.6 to create the releases, but in fact 
a custom distro based on RHEL 6.6. (off on a tangent here: Qt 5.6 sources 
actually don't even compile on an out-of-the-box RHEL 6.6 because we now missed 
that during verification (bug created!). And actually by us installing 
devtoolsets provided by RHEL, us installing custom Pythons, extracting own 
libclangs, perhaps build our own openssl from sources, one could actually 
argue, that we don't use RHEL 7.4 either, but our own custom Linux based on 
RHEL 7.4.


Lifespan of distros
---
This is something we should have thought more about, but didn't. Perhaps still 
don't. Let's take Qt 5.12 as a good example here. Qt 5.12.0 was released on the 
6th Dec 2018. It has a promised lifespan to at least the end of 2021. With us 
actually going development and testing before the actual release, we need to 
have the environment which we work on working at least 6 months before we 
release. Now that RHEL 7.4 was such an environment which was available then. 
Already released July 2017 and having an EOL (end of life) August 2019. 
Perfect! But the problem is our Qt 5.12.2, .3, .4, .5 releases. Should we be 
doing releases with a distro that isn't even supported by RedHat themselves? 
And there's the big question #1!

Because of ignorance we didn't think about this when we documented things. We 
just blindly say that Qt 5.12 supports RHEL 7.4, because that's what we have in 
the CI! Yeah, but are we really supporting it in 2021, when RedHat themselves 
have pulled the plug on it over 2 years before that? Could we just update to 
the latest RHEL after all? Especially since we didn't use RHEL 7.4 to begin 
with, but our own distro as we modified the original RHEL?
Tony Sarajärvi
CI Tech Lead

The Qt Company
Elektroniikkatie 13
90590, Oulu, Finland
[email protected]
+358 50 482 1416
http://qt.io









_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Reply via email to