Rohan wrote:
> I have some comments on the target platforms.
> 
>     On all platforms, Open GL (ES) 2.0 is required.
>     linux-x86-32-gcc-x11     Ubuntu Linux 10.04 ×86 32 bit, X11
>     linux-x86-64-gcc-x11     Ubuntu Linux 10.04 ×86 64 bit, X11
>     linux-x86-32-gcc-wayland         Linux Ubuntu 10.04 ×86 32-bit, Wayland

> I think that Ubuntu 10.04 maybe too old already.  The Mesa version shipped
> on that Ubuntu can't do GLES2.0 AFAIK.  Also I think there is no wayland
> compositor available out-of-the-box.  In other words, to actually test Qt5
> with wayland and GLES2.0 on Ubuntu 10.04, you probably have to change the
> environment to the point where it's no longer accurate to call it "Ubuntu
> 10.04".
 
> We already plan to test with Ubuntu 11.10 in CI, so the question is whether
> or not 10.04 should be kept as well.

Probably not. I updated the table for now along these lines. 

Thiago, Craig: if we later agree to use something LSB based, let's then update 
this. I changed the headings of the table to indicate that we're specifying the 
CI system configuration, rather than the reference platform, that might indeed 
be a bit more abstract and general..
 
>     linux-arm7-gcc-wayland   Linux, ARM7, Wayland    gcc 4.5 ?
> 
> The platform must be specified more completely.  Right now it specifies that
> the kernel is Linux, CPU is ARMv7, "wayland" is used somehow and gcc 4.5
> may be used.  There's a lot of gaps to be filled in :) We should find some
> existing platform which fits these specs, and specify that as the target
> instead.  If such a thing doesn't exist then I guess we shouldn't target it.

It'd be good  to find a configuration in the CI for this. I documented that we 
need to specify this in more detail.

>     osx-10.7-64    Apple Mac OS X 10.7 “Lion” Cocoa 64 bit
>     osx-10.6-64    Apple Mac OS X 10.6 “Snow Leopard” Cocoa 64 bit
>     osx-10.6-32    Apple Mac OS X 10.6 “Snow Leopard” Cocoa 32 bit
> 
> Out of the listed platforms, Macs are the most expensive and least reliable
> for CI purposes, so it would be really great if we could cut these down a bit.
> At least testing 32-bit OSX 10.6 in CI is probably a waste (?)  I would like 
> to go
> even further and do Qt 5.0 CI with OSX >= 10.7 only.  Older OSX could still
> have some release testing if it's perceived as valuable.

It would indeed be good to keep the list of reference configurations shorter. I 
moved 10.6 to the second table (platforms we would like to support). 
(Well, I believe Tier 1 has been so far defined to be included in the CI, but 
anyways.)

Best regards,
Henry



_______________________________________________
Qt5-feedback mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback

Reply via email to