Re: dejagnu version update?

[Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>]

On 09/15/2015 01:23 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On September 15, 2015 7:39:39 PM GMT+02:00, Mike Stump
> <mikestump@comcast.net> wrote:
> > On Sep 14, 2015, at 3:37 PM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > Maybe GCC-6 can bump the required dejagnu version to allow for
> > > > getting rid of all these superfluous load_gcc_lib? *blink* :)
> > > I'd support that as a direction.
> > >
> > > Certainly dropping the 2001 version from our website in favor of
> > > 1.5
> > (which is what I'm using anyway) would be a step forward.
> >
> > So, even ubuntu LTS is 1.5 now.  No harm in upgrading the website
> > to 1.5.  I donât know of any reason to not update and just require
> > 1.5 at this point.  Iâm not a fan of feature chasing dejagnu, but
> > an update every 2-4 years isnât unreasonable.
> >
> > So, letâs do it this wayâ  Any serious and compelling reason to
> > not update to 1.5?  If none, letâs update to 1.5 in another week or
> > two, if no serious and compelling reasons not to.
> >
> > My general plan is, slow cycle updates on dejagnu, maybe every 2
> > years. LTS style releases should have the version in it before the
> > requirement is updated.  I take this approach as I think this
> > should be the maximal change rate of things like make, gcc, g++,
> > ld, if possible.
>
> Yea, although this means that 1.5.3 (a Version with the libdirs
> tweak) being just 5 months old will have to wait another bump, I
> fear. For my part going to plain 1.5 is useless WRT the load_lib
> situation. I see no value in conditionalizing simplified libdir
> handling on a lucky user with recentish stuff so i'm just waiting
> another 2 or 4 years for this very minor cleanup.
Given we haven't updated the dejagnu reqs since ~2001, I think stepping 
forward would be appropriate and I'd support moving all the way to 1.5.3 
with the expectation that we'll be on a cadence of no faster than 2 
years going forward.

jeff