Re: Removing support for OS/2
11 февр. 2014 г., в 0:01, Ehsan Akhgari ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com написал(а): OK, that works for me. FWIW any time that you guys decide to revive this code in your own private branch, you can simply revert the patch to bug 969757 and merge it against the trunk, and start working on the port with that baseline. Sure, we will find a way to handle that in any case. -- keep cool, dmik ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
Hello Ehsan, 10 февр. 2014 г., в 20:19, Ehsan Akhgari ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com написал(а): Can you please point us to where this work is happening? I'm only aware of this repository: https://github.com/bitwiseworks/mozilla-os2 This is the right place. Do you plan to move your development to trunk in the near future? The Firefox 17 ESR code base that the mozilla-os2 repository is based on is *ancient* and there will be a lot of changes when you try to merge with the current trunk, which means that a lot of the fixes you're working on will be obsolete by the time you do the merge, and you may need to repeat a lot of work on top of the new trunk. Yes, of course, our plan is to rebase on FF24 when we decide that FF17 is kind of stable and then eventually switch to the trunk at some point. WRT ancientry, well, I think that FF10 was much «older» compared to FF17 than FF17 compared to FF24 if you look at platform-dependent parts. My main work now is port the new IPC stuff used for out-of-process business in modern Firefox and this is almost done. I don’t expect a lot to be changed in this regard in FF24. Other than that, the old OS/2 code (FS access, window management, 2d painting and such) still continues to work for us quite well. I rarely touch it (at least not for FF17). Another issue, are you planning to upstream your work to Mozilla in the near future? The current state of the OS2 port on trunk is unclear. We know that it has probably been broken for at least the last 2 years due to a missing TimeStamp implementation for OS2 and we have been carrying around this broken code for a long time. As Gregory mentioned, I have a patch in bug 969757 to remove this code completely, but obviously taking that patch doesn't make any sense if you're going to move to trunk at some point in the near future. (Note that I think some of the recent build system changes have started to remove some OS2 bits from the new moz.build based build system, so porting your work to trunk will probably require finding and fixing those cases as well.) We’d wish to put our work upstream some day, definitely. I was complaining though that this is not a fast and easy process (given my past experience) so for our «daily» commits we prefer to use our own repository. And we also want to get a stable version first before pushing our changes upstream. The TimeStamp issue was already resolved as part of my FF17 job and it’s in our repo (just a simple solution for now). I also commit OS/2-specific original build system changes to that repo since we still use it (as I wrote in the previous message). It all started (I mean my participation involving creating a separate repo and such) when the Mozilla team decided to drop MOZ_IPC support (FF11 IIRC). This immediately broke the OS/2 build since the chromium based IPC parts were simply missing on OS/2 and it turned out to be a big piece of work, too much for the previous OS/2 maintainer. This is why we changed the plan of supplying small patches upstream used before that point. So I think the best is to leave the OS/2 bits in. I would also not mind if someone from the Mozilla team voted to help me later with pushing our changes upstream. -- keep cool, dmik ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
On 2/8/2014 1:57 AM, Gregory Szorc wrote: Bug 969757 currently has a patch to remove most remnants of OS/2 from the *entire* tree. If you have any interest in preserving references to OS/2 in the tree, now would be the time to speak up. To be blunt: this ship has sailed. I don't think we will accept patches for OS/2 support in the future, regardless of the state of the port. -Ted ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
Gregory, 08 февр. 2014 г., в 10:57, Gregory Szorc g...@mozilla.com написал(а): On 8/7/13, 1:00 PM, d...@dmik.org wrote: Regarding the main subject. There are many OS/2 parts that are still valid (e.g. the NSPR code) so if you will drop them we will have to reapply them back in our repo. And if we push it back later you will have to reapply them again. This doesn't make sense to me — if you are going to accept our patches at some later stage. If you are certainly not, then you may go on with that. I'm also ready to listen to any other ideas on how we can collaborate in this case. I just realized I never replied to this thread! I’m glad that someone reacted, finally :) Given: a) the in-tree OS/2 port hasn't worked in over 2 years b) the OS/2 port is using a shadow build system, independent of the official one c) there appears to be little desire to use the official build system for an OS/2 port at this time It's my determination that OS/2 has little use in the Firefox *build system*. (The OS/2 port may wish for some references to remain in C++.) Bug 969757 currently has a patch to remove most remnants of OS/2 from the *entire* tree. If you have any interest in preserving references to OS/2 in the tree, now would be the time to speak up. The current situation is little bit different from what it was in my last answer. We had to switch back to the original build system for the time being. There turned out to be soo many things to do (Mozilla is a giant monster source wise) that we postponed the task of porting the build system to kBuild and directed our (limited) resources to porting Mozilla itself (and went pretty far on that way — FF17 now runs on OS/2 and even out-of-process Flash works). So I would like to ask you to preserve OS/2 in configure and makefiles for now. -- keep cool, dmik ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
Hi Dmitriy, On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:46 AM, Dmitriy Kuminov d...@dmik.org wrote: Gregory, 08 февр. 2014 г., в 10:57, Gregory Szorc g...@mozilla.com написал(а): On 8/7/13, 1:00 PM, d...@dmik.org wrote: Regarding the main subject. There are many OS/2 parts that are still valid (e.g. the NSPR code) so if you will drop them we will have to reapply them back in our repo. And if we push it back later you will have to reapply them again. This doesn't make sense to me — if you are going to accept our patches at some later stage. If you are certainly not, then you may go on with that. I'm also ready to listen to any other ideas on how we can collaborate in this case. I just realized I never replied to this thread! I’m glad that someone reacted, finally :) Given: a) the in-tree OS/2 port hasn't worked in over 2 years b) the OS/2 port is using a shadow build system, independent of the official one c) there appears to be little desire to use the official build system for an OS/2 port at this time It's my determination that OS/2 has little use in the Firefox *build system*. (The OS/2 port may wish for some references to remain in C++.) Bug 969757 currently has a patch to remove most remnants of OS/2 from the *entire* tree. If you have any interest in preserving references to OS/2 in the tree, now would be the time to speak up. The current situation is little bit different from what it was in my last answer. We had to switch back to the original build system for the time being. There turned out to be soo many things to do (Mozilla is a giant monster source wise) that we postponed the task of porting the build system to kBuild and directed our (limited) resources to porting Mozilla itself (and went pretty far on that way — FF17 now runs on OS/2 and even out-of-process Flash works). So I would like to ask you to preserve OS/2 in configure and makefiles for now. Can you please point us to where this work is happening? I'm only aware of this repository: https://github.com/bitwiseworks/mozilla-os2 Do you plan to move your development to trunk in the near future? The Firefox 17 ESR code base that the mozilla-os2 repository is based on is *ancient* and there will be a lot of changes when you try to merge with the current trunk, which means that a lot of the fixes you're working on will be obsolete by the time you do the merge, and you may need to repeat a lot of work on top of the new trunk. Another issue, are you planning to upstream your work to Mozilla in the near future? The current state of the OS2 port on trunk is unclear. We know that it has probably been broken for at least the last 2 years due to a missing TimeStamp implementation for OS2 and we have been carrying around this broken code for a long time. As Gregory mentioned, I have a patch in bug 969757 to remove this code completely, but obviously taking that patch doesn't make any sense if you're going to move to trunk at some point in the near future. (Note that I think some of the recent build system changes have started to remove some OS2 bits from the new moz.build based build system, so porting your work to trunk will probably require finding and fixing those cases as well.) Thanks! -- Ehsan http://ehsanakhgari.org/ ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
Another issue, are you planning to upstream your work to Mozilla in the near future? Regardless of intent, I don't think any OS/2 support patches should be accepted in mozilla-central. A platform port like that is too high touch and low-value to be worth the maintenance burden in mozilla-central, unfortunately. We should fix bug 969757 and accept that any OS/2 support efforts going forward need to be maintained outside of mozilla-central. Gavin On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Ehsan Akhgari ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Dmitriy, On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:46 AM, Dmitriy Kuminov d...@dmik.org wrote: Gregory, 08 февр. 2014 г., в 10:57, Gregory Szorc g...@mozilla.com написал(а): On 8/7/13, 1:00 PM, d...@dmik.org wrote: Regarding the main subject. There are many OS/2 parts that are still valid (e.g. the NSPR code) so if you will drop them we will have to reapply them back in our repo. And if we push it back later you will have to reapply them again. This doesn't make sense to me — if you are going to accept our patches at some later stage. If you are certainly not, then you may go on with that. I'm also ready to listen to any other ideas on how we can collaborate in this case. I just realized I never replied to this thread! I’m glad that someone reacted, finally :) Given: a) the in-tree OS/2 port hasn't worked in over 2 years b) the OS/2 port is using a shadow build system, independent of the official one c) there appears to be little desire to use the official build system for an OS/2 port at this time It's my determination that OS/2 has little use in the Firefox *build system*. (The OS/2 port may wish for some references to remain in C++.) Bug 969757 currently has a patch to remove most remnants of OS/2 from the *entire* tree. If you have any interest in preserving references to OS/2 in the tree, now would be the time to speak up. The current situation is little bit different from what it was in my last answer. We had to switch back to the original build system for the time being. There turned out to be soo many things to do (Mozilla is a giant monster source wise) that we postponed the task of porting the build system to kBuild and directed our (limited) resources to porting Mozilla itself (and went pretty far on that way — FF17 now runs on OS/2 and even out-of-process Flash works). So I would like to ask you to preserve OS/2 in configure and makefiles for now. Can you please point us to where this work is happening? I'm only aware of this repository: https://github.com/bitwiseworks/mozilla-os2 Do you plan to move your development to trunk in the near future? The Firefox 17 ESR code base that the mozilla-os2 repository is based on is *ancient* and there will be a lot of changes when you try to merge with the current trunk, which means that a lot of the fixes you're working on will be obsolete by the time you do the merge, and you may need to repeat a lot of work on top of the new trunk. Another issue, are you planning to upstream your work to Mozilla in the near future? The current state of the OS2 port on trunk is unclear. We know that it has probably been broken for at least the last 2 years due to a missing TimeStamp implementation for OS2 and we have been carrying around this broken code for a long time. As Gregory mentioned, I have a patch in bug 969757 to remove this code completely, but obviously taking that patch doesn't make any sense if you're going to move to trunk at some point in the near future. (Note that I think some of the recent build system changes have started to remove some OS2 bits from the new moz.build based build system, so porting your work to trunk will probably require finding and fixing those cases as well.) Thanks! -- Ehsan http://ehsanakhgari.org/ ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Gavin Sharp ga...@gavinsharp.com wrote: Another issue, are you planning to upstream your work to Mozilla in the near future? Regardless of intent, I don't think any OS/2 support patches should be accepted in mozilla-central. A platform port like that is too high touch and low-value to be worth the maintenance burden in mozilla-central, unfortunately. We should fix bug 969757 and accept that any OS/2 support efforts going forward need to be maintained outside of mozilla-central. OK, that works for me. FWIW any time that you guys decide to revive this code in your own private branch, you can simply revert the patch to bug 969757 and merge it against the trunk, and start working on the port with that baseline. Cheers, -- Ehsan http://ehsanakhgari.org/ On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Ehsan Akhgari ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Dmitriy, On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:46 AM, Dmitriy Kuminov d...@dmik.org wrote: Gregory, 08 февр. 2014 г., в 10:57, Gregory Szorc g...@mozilla.com написал(а): On 8/7/13, 1:00 PM, d...@dmik.org wrote: Regarding the main subject. There are many OS/2 parts that are still valid (e.g. the NSPR code) so if you will drop them we will have to reapply them back in our repo. And if we push it back later you will have to reapply them again. This doesn't make sense to me — if you are going to accept our patches at some later stage. If you are certainly not, then you may go on with that. I'm also ready to listen to any other ideas on how we can collaborate in this case. I just realized I never replied to this thread! I’m glad that someone reacted, finally :) Given: a) the in-tree OS/2 port hasn't worked in over 2 years b) the OS/2 port is using a shadow build system, independent of the official one c) there appears to be little desire to use the official build system for an OS/2 port at this time It's my determination that OS/2 has little use in the Firefox *build system*. (The OS/2 port may wish for some references to remain in C++.) Bug 969757 currently has a patch to remove most remnants of OS/2 from the *entire* tree. If you have any interest in preserving references to OS/2 in the tree, now would be the time to speak up. The current situation is little bit different from what it was in my last answer. We had to switch back to the original build system for the time being. There turned out to be soo many things to do (Mozilla is a giant monster source wise) that we postponed the task of porting the build system to kBuild and directed our (limited) resources to porting Mozilla itself (and went pretty far on that way — FF17 now runs on OS/2 and even out-of-process Flash works). So I would like to ask you to preserve OS/2 in configure and makefiles for now. Can you please point us to where this work is happening? I'm only aware of this repository: https://github.com/bitwiseworks/mozilla-os2 Do you plan to move your development to trunk in the near future? The Firefox 17 ESR code base that the mozilla-os2 repository is based on is *ancient* and there will be a lot of changes when you try to merge with the current trunk, which means that a lot of the fixes you're working on will be obsolete by the time you do the merge, and you may need to repeat a lot of work on top of the new trunk. Another issue, are you planning to upstream your work to Mozilla in the near future? The current state of the OS2 port on trunk is unclear. We know that it has probably been broken for at least the last 2 years due to a missing TimeStamp implementation for OS2 and we have been carrying around this broken code for a long time. As Gregory mentioned, I have a patch in bug 969757 to remove this code completely, but obviously taking that patch doesn't make any sense if you're going to move to trunk at some point in the near future. (Note that I think some of the recent build system changes have started to remove some OS2 bits from the new moz.build based build system, so porting your work to trunk will probably require finding and fixing those cases as well.) Thanks! -- Ehsan http://ehsanakhgari.org/ ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
On 8/7/13, 1:00 PM, d...@dmik.org wrote: пятница, 2 августа 2013 г., 3:13:23 UTC+4 пользователь Gregory Szorc написал: Are there any objections to this proposal? Hello everybody, I'm the person who's being actively working now on getting Mozilla build on OS/2 again with all the new IPC stuff in. As Peter said, at the present time we have no plans to push our patches but that's only because from my experience this process is very complex and we have very limited resources for working on that task (no surprise). So our idea is to get it all working again first, then create a smaller number of bigger (and logically consistent) patches and try to push them upstream — while still continuing development in our own repo so that we don't depend on how fast the patches are accepted etc. If anybody has a better idea, we are ready to consider it. What about switching the build system, it's not our primary task of course but it will be done sooner or later — this is all to have a more robust build environment and thus save some resources here too. An ideal solution for us in the future would be to put the build files of the new build system (Makefile.kmk, generally one per each subdir) upstream but I'm not sure if it will ever be accepted — this is another reason why we decided to stick to our own repo for the time being. In either case, removing OS/2 support from the existing makefiles - may be done (but better after we completely move away to kBuild). Regarding the main subject. There are many OS/2 parts that are still valid (e.g. the NSPR code) so if you will drop them we will have to reapply them back in our repo. And if we push it back later you will have to reapply them again. This doesn't make sense to me — if you are going to accept our patches at some later stage. If you are certainly not, then you may go on with that. I'm also ready to listen to any other ideas on how we can collaborate in this case. I just realized I never replied to this thread! Given: a) the in-tree OS/2 port hasn't worked in over 2 years b) the OS/2 port is using a shadow build system, independent of the official one c) there appears to be little desire to use the official build system for an OS/2 port at this time It's my determination that OS/2 has little use in the Firefox *build system*. (The OS/2 port may wish for some references to remain in C++.) Bug 969757 currently has a patch to remove most remnants of OS/2 from the *entire* tree. If you have any interest in preserving references to OS/2 in the tree, now would be the time to speak up. Gregory ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
пятница, 2 августа 2013 г., 3:13:23 UTC+4 пользователь Gregory Szorc написал: Are there any objections to this proposal? Hello everybody, I'm the person who's being actively working now on getting Mozilla build on OS/2 again with all the new IPC stuff in. As Peter said, at the present time we have no plans to push our patches but that's only because from my experience this process is very complex and we have very limited resources for working on that task (no surprise). So our idea is to get it all working again first, then create a smaller number of bigger (and logically consistent) patches and try to push them upstream — while still continuing development in our own repo so that we don't depend on how fast the patches are accepted etc. If anybody has a better idea, we are ready to consider it. What about switching the build system, it's not our primary task of course but it will be done sooner or later — this is all to have a more robust build environment and thus save some resources here too. An ideal solution for us in the future would be to put the build files of the new build system (Makefile.kmk, generally one per each subdir) upstream but I'm not sure if it will ever be accepted — this is another reason why we decided to stick to our own repo for the time being. In either case, removing OS/2 support from the existing makefiles - may be done (but better after we completely move away to kBuild). Regarding the main subject. There are many OS/2 parts that are still valid (e.g. the NSPR code) so if you will drop them we will have to reapply them back in our repo. And if we push it back later you will have to reapply them again. This doesn't make sense to me — if you are going to accept our patches at some later stage. If you are certainly not, then you may go on with that. I'm also ready to listen to any other ideas on how we can collaborate in this case. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
On 8/7/13 1:00 PM, d...@dmik.org wrote: What about switching the build system, it's not our primary task of course but it will be done sooner or later — this is all to have a more robust build environment Why does the OS/2 port need a different build system? I'm not familiar with OS/2 development, but is GNU Make not an option? chris ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
четверг, 8 августа 2013 г., 0:48:04 UTC+4 пользователь Chris Peterson написал: Why does the OS/2 port need a different build system? I'm not familiar with OS/2 development, but is GNU Make not an option? If it were only GNU Make it wouldn't be such a problem (we have quite a recent GNU Make port). But it's not, most problems come from the autoconf side and the tool chain expected by it. OS/2 is not *nix and not all tools are at current versions (some are not maintained at all). There are also many problems related to the ltmain script hell as well. Also, things on OS/2 are pretty much constant to the extent that many configure tests are redundant and just waste build time. Besides that, there are several things about the way how the original build system is structured that I don't like. One of them is putting many headers to the build dir instead of including them from their original locations which requires to run the build process from the root when one of these headers is changed (in order to re-export it) which is quite time consuming. In general, partial building from subdirectories (which I use very often during my development) is not well supported. kBuild solves all these problems. It's a much more clean (and usually also a faster) solution. I'd wish to see Mozilla moved to it cross platform -) (well, it will actually be a piece of cake once the switch for OS/2 is done — kBuild is cross-platform per se and includes a tool chain for each supported platform). ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
Hi, sorry for the delay to reply. My change was performed mechanically without any tests. So, I don't know if the OS/2 widget is actually alive. However, I was requested a review of IME code for OS/2 on this June. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=768742 Therefore, I was thinking that it's alive. On 2013/08/02 8:39, Mike Hommey wrote: CCing the last two persons who submitted patches for OS/2 On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 04:13:23PM -0700, Gregory Szorc wrote: We have a number of references to OS/2 throughout the build system and source tree. According to Kyle Huey OS/2 has likely broken since we removed --disable-ipc (bug 638755) in March 2011. While OS/2 is a tier-3 supported build configuration [1], we will shortly be rewriting a bunch of the build rules to handle non-recursive compilation. Since OS/2 is effectively dead as an operating system and since it apparently hasn't been able to build mozilla-central since 2011 without many people complaining AFAIK, I'm proposing that we remove traces of OS/2 from the build system. This likely plays out as not carrying OS/2 support forward as we change things. If the OS/2 community wishes to submit patches to re-add support, we can accept them, just like any tier-3 platform. Just to be clear, I don't believe other tier-3 operating systems may fall victim during refactors. OS/2 is special in that the OS is officially dead and sufficiently different from other supported platforms. It therefore is a non-trivial burden for us to attempt support as we perform large refactors to the build system. Are there any objections to this proposal? Gregory Szorc Build Config Module Owner [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Supported_build_configurations ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform -- Masayuki Nakano masay...@d-toybox.com Manager, Internationalization, Mozilla Japan. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
Hi Gregory et al., On Fri, 2 Aug 2013, Mike Hommey wrote: CCing the last two persons who submitted patches for OS/2 On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 04:13:23PM -0700, Gregory Szorc wrote: We have a number of references to OS/2 throughout the build system and source tree. According to Kyle Huey OS/2 has likely broken since we removed --disable-ipc (bug 638755) in March 2011. While OS/2 is a tier-3 supported build configuration [1], we will shortly be rewriting a bunch of the build rules to handle non-recursive compilation. Since OS/2 is effectively dead as an operating system and since it apparently hasn't been able to build mozilla-central since 2011 without many people complaining AFAIK, I'm proposing that we remove traces of OS/2 from the build system. This likely plays out as not carrying OS/2 support forward as we change things. If the OS/2 community wishes to submit patches to re-add support, we can accept them, just like any tier-3 platform. Just to be clear, I don't believe other tier-3 operating systems may fall victim during refactors. OS/2 is special in that the OS is officially dead and sufficiently different from other supported platforms. It therefore is a non-trivial burden for us to attempt support as we perform large refactors to the build system. Are there any objections to this proposal? There is an ongoing port (currently of the 17 ESR branch of Firefox) here: https://github.com/bitwiseworks/mozilla-os2 From the discussion in the mozilla.dev.ports.os2 newsgroup (that I just glanced at) I take it that they had some success but they are not planning to push the changes back to upstream, so I guess it doesn't influence them much, if you rip out OS/2 support from the main tree. In fact, one of the first items on their list was to rewrite the build system to kBuild, so removing OS/2 from the Mozilla build system should be fine. So I agree with your proposal, but as I have no relations to the team doing that, I could be wrong. Peter. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
On 8/3/13 8:11 AM, Peter Weilbacher wrote: We have a number of references to OS/2 throughout the build system and source tree. According to Kyle Huey OS/2 has likely broken since we removed --disable-ipc (bug 638755) in March 2011. While OS/2 is a tier-3 supported build configuration [1], we will shortly be rewriting a bunch of the build rules to handle non-recursive compilation. Since OS/2 is effectively dead as an operating system and since it apparently hasn't been able to build mozilla-central since 2011 without many people complaining AFAIK, I'm proposing that we remove traces of OS/2 from the build system. This likely plays out as not carrying OS/2 support forward as we change things. If the OS/2 community wishes to submit patches to re-add support, we can accept them, just like any tier-3 platform. Just to be clear, I don't believe other tier-3 operating systems may fall victim during refactors. OS/2 is special in that the OS is officially dead and sufficiently different from other supported platforms. It therefore is a non-trivial burden for us to attempt support as we perform large refactors to the build system. Are there any objections to this proposal? There is an ongoing port (currently of the 17 ESR branch of Firefox) here: https://github.com/bitwiseworks/mozilla-os2 From the discussion in the mozilla.dev.ports.os2 newsgroup (that I just glanced at) I take it that they had some success but they are not planning to push the changes back to upstream, so I guess it doesn't influence them much, if you rip out OS/2 support from the main tree. In fact, one of the first items on their list was to rewrite the build system to kBuild, so removing OS/2 from the Mozilla build system should be fine. So I agree with your proposal, but as I have no relations to the team doing that, I could be wrong. Dave Yeo would be the right person to ask, since his name is over most of m.dev.ports.os2 (dave.r.yeo AT gmail). Cameron Kaiser ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 04:13:23PM -0700, Gregory Szorc wrote: We have a number of references to OS/2 throughout the build system and source tree. According to Kyle Huey OS/2 has likely broken since we removed --disable-ipc (bug 638755) in March 2011. There have been OS/2-related changes landing way after that date, so I doubt it is actually broken. In fact, there's been an OS/2 specific landing a week ago (!). Mike ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
CCing the last two persons who submitted patches for OS/2 On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 04:13:23PM -0700, Gregory Szorc wrote: We have a number of references to OS/2 throughout the build system and source tree. According to Kyle Huey OS/2 has likely broken since we removed --disable-ipc (bug 638755) in March 2011. While OS/2 is a tier-3 supported build configuration [1], we will shortly be rewriting a bunch of the build rules to handle non-recursive compilation. Since OS/2 is effectively dead as an operating system and since it apparently hasn't been able to build mozilla-central since 2011 without many people complaining AFAIK, I'm proposing that we remove traces of OS/2 from the build system. This likely plays out as not carrying OS/2 support forward as we change things. If the OS/2 community wishes to submit patches to re-add support, we can accept them, just like any tier-3 platform. Just to be clear, I don't believe other tier-3 operating systems may fall victim during refactors. OS/2 is special in that the OS is officially dead and sufficiently different from other supported platforms. It therefore is a non-trivial burden for us to attempt support as we perform large refactors to the build system. Are there any objections to this proposal? Gregory Szorc Build Config Module Owner [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Supported_build_configurations ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Mike Hommey m...@glandium.org wrote: There have been OS/2-related changes landing way after that date, so I doubt it is actually broken. In fact, there's been an OS/2 specific landing a week ago (!). Bug 501496 and bug 712105 were pretty mechanical changes that just mirrored changes to other widget implementations. I imagine they were done blindly and without testing. They should not be confused with actual OS/2 maintenance work. Gavin ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Removing support for OS/2
On 2013-08-01, at 7:38 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 04:13:23PM -0700, Gregory Szorc wrote: We have a number of references to OS/2 throughout the build system and source tree. According to Kyle Huey OS/2 has likely broken since we removed --disable-ipc (bug 638755) in March 2011. There have been OS/2-related changes landing way after that date, so I doubt it is actually broken. In fact, there's been an OS/2 specific landing a week ago (!). I removed the NSPR TimeStamp implementation on May 4 2012. We've only been supporting POSIX, Windows and MacOSX since then. -Jeff ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
