Re: [PATCH] Fix build with GNU Make 3.81

[Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>]

On 7/15/20 3:44 PM, Simon Marchi wrote:
> On 2020-07-15 4:19 a.m., Tom de Vries wrote:
>> I don't follow this reasoning.
>>
>> There's a bug in make 3.81, which we run into with the gdb build.
>>
>> We then require make 3.82, such that gdb builds again for all supported
>> make versions.
>>
>> Subsequently (that is, 3 days later) we work around the bug in make 3.81
>> with a gdb commit.
>>
>> But we decide to still require make 3.82, even if the original reason to
>> do so is no longer valid, and I'm assuming we haven't started using make
>> 3.82 features in the 3 days inbetween.
>>
>> Are there other considerations at play here, that are not being made
>> explicit?
>>
>> Because if there are not, we should update NEWS to say we support 3.81
>> again.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> - Tom
>>
> 
> Hi Tom,
> 
> Requiring make 3.82 was based on the assumption that pretty much all supported
> versions of major distros had 3.82 bundled (which turned out false for SLES11).

Yeah.  And looking here (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUSE_Linux_Enterprise_Server#End-of-support_schedule
), that's still supported till 31 March 2022.

> So the simplest thing to do when it was found that GDB wouldn't build with 3.81
> was just to say "don't use 3.81", rather than trying to work around the bug.
> 

Right, that made sense at that point.

> Even with the claim that we require make 3.82, if somebody provides a simple fix
> (like Bernd did) to make it work again with 3.81, then I'm happy to merge it.  It
> makes his life easier, and it doesn't affect mine.
> 

Agreed.

> If we claim in NEWS that we support 3.81 again, then we ideally have to test it
> regularly and take care of any breakage.

Test it, yes.  Take care of any breakage, if it's reasonable for
upstream sources.  If not, we always have the option of requiring 3.82
at that point.

> That's not something I want to do, but
> if it is something you need to support (because you need to support SLES11) and
> are ready to take care of that support, then I have nothing against it.

Sure, I can set make 3.81 as my default make for development builds, and
I should at least encounter any breakage that way.

Anyways, I understand now, the decision to move to 3.82 was triggered by
the 3.81 build breaker, but based on the assumption that 3.81 was not
provided by any of the major distros so nobody would need to test and
support it, and when the build breaker got fixed, that reasoning didn't
change.

It all makes sense to me now, thanks for elaborating.

Thanks,
- Tom