kicad-developers team mailing list archive
-
kicad-developers team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #42324
Re: Minimum Boost version
+1
ons. 23. okt. 2019 15.28 skrev Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>:
> One thing we don't specify on the system requirements page on the KiCad
> website is whether or not this applies to the current stable release or
> the nightly builds. Since we don't specify this, I can see how users
> would assume that it's all versions of KiCad. Perhaps we should note
> that this is only applicable to the current stable version and that
> nightly builds may not support older Linux distributions due to the
> availability of dependency library versions. I don't think it's
> reasonable to expect the latest development version of KiCad to continue
> to support legacy Linux distros. The current LTS release of Ubuntu is
> 18.04 which supports boost version 1.65. I think attempting to support
> nightly builds on Ubuntu 16.04 is going to continue cause headaches as
> time goes on. If no one objects, I will update the system requirements
> page accordingly.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Wayne
>
> On 10/23/2019 1:39 AM, Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:
> > It should also be noted that 20.04 will be the next LTS release of
> > Ubuntu. This means that there will be two post-16.04 LTS releases out
> > there before KiCad 6 will be released (I'm not *that* optimistic :) ).
> > Is it really worth it to actively support 3 different LTS releases? It
> > doesn't sound very realistic. How many users would actually be affected
> > if KiCad 6 wouldn't be available for 16.04? 1000s? 100s? 10? And if they
> > continue with 16.04 until 2021, why would they need to switch to KiCad 6
> > before that?
> >
> > Eeli Kaikkonen
> >
> > ke 23. lokak. 2019 klo 3.05 Seth Hillbrand (seth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > <mailto:seth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>) kirjoitti:
> >
> > On 2019-10-22 16:06, Ian McInerney wrote:
> >
> >> I dug into the website history and apparently the original intent
> >> should have been to support 16.04 LTS until its standard support
> >> ends in 2021
> >> (
> https://github.com/KiCad/kicad-website/commit/007fb582a316fa513778a393e2696d17c0031cea#r33487782
> ).
> >> Since we haven't actually used any code from the newer Boost
> >> version (that we weren't already using), we should probably back
> >> out the change and also update the website with the correct Ubuntu
> >> LTS support date. It looks like that will make it so we can't
> >> update to 1.59 until 2021 then.
> >>
> >
> > Hi Ian-
> >
> > I did write that. In retrospect, I'm not sure that the sentiment is
> > correct. One of the things we are attempting to do is focus our
> > primary efforts where they will have the largest impact for our
> > users. Toward that end, we were attempting (in the post KiCon
> > meeting) to define where that cut off should be. We kind of
> > arbitrary picked "vendor supported" as it seemed reasonable.
> >
> > I now think we should tighten that a bit more for the Linux
> > distributions. Under MSW/Mac, we compile or have rolling updates
> > for most of our own dependencies. This allows us to ensure system
> > compatibility but not worry about library compatibility. The Linux
> > library system is different and holds back updates.
> >
> > So, why would we want to update the boost libraries and what does it
> > gain us? The original bump was to allow unit tests. During v6, I
> > would also like to utilize the UUID library from 1.60 as many of the
> > feature we plan will require GUID at least.
> >
> > This doesn't preclude using KiCad on 16.04. It just requires
> > someone to package a boost ppa. There are a few out there that
> > could be used as baselines for this.
> >
> > -Seth
> >
> >
> > KiCad Services Corporation KiCad Services Corporation Logo
> > Seth Hillbrand
> > *Lead Developer*
> > +1-530-302-5483 <tel:+12126039372>
> > Davis, CA
> > www.kipro-pcb.com <http://www.kipro-pcb.com/> info@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > <mailto:info@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > https://twitter.com/KiProEDA <https://twitter.com/KiProEDA>
> > https://www.linkedin.com/company/kicad
> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/kicad>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> > Post to : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> > Post to : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
References
-
Minimum Boost version
From: Blair Bonnett, 2019-08-28
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Wayne Stambaugh, 2019-08-29
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Blair Bonnett, 2019-08-31
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Ian McInerney, 2019-09-26
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Carsten Schoenert, 2019-09-27
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Wayne Stambaugh, 2019-10-03
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Wayne Stambaugh, 2019-10-03
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Diego Herranz, 2019-10-21
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Ian McInerney, 2019-10-21
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Diego Herranz, 2019-10-21
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Wayne Stambaugh, 2019-10-21
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Ian McInerney, 2019-10-22
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Seth Hillbrand, 2019-10-23
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Eeli Kaikkonen, 2019-10-23
-
Re: Minimum Boost version
From: Wayne Stambaugh, 2019-10-23