Re: [poky] [kirkstone][PATCH] poky.conf: update SANITY_TESTED_DISTROS to match autobuilder

On 21.12.23 at 11:45, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-12-21 at 11:41 +0100, Michael Opdenacker wrote:
>> On 21.12.23 at 00:31, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2023-12-20 at 16:26 +0100, Michael Opdenacker via
>>> lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
>>>> From: Michael Opdenacker <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>>   From the intersection of the list of allowed workers
>>>> on https://git.yoctoproject.org/yocto-autobuilder2/tree/config.py
>>>> and the active workers on
>>>> https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/workers
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Opdenacker <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>>    meta-poky/conf/distro/poky.conf | 3 +--
>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/meta-poky/conf/distro/poky.conf b/meta-poky/conf/distro/poky.conf
>>>> index c179cbf..f5aff32 100644
>>>> --- a/meta-poky/conf/distro/poky.conf
>>>> +++ b/meta-poky/conf/distro/poky.conf
>>>> @@ -37,9 +37,8 @@ SANITY_TESTED_DISTROS ?= " \
>>>>                ubuntu-18.04 \n \
>>>>                ubuntu-20.04 \n \
>>>>                ubuntu-22.04 \n \
>>>> -            fedora-37 \n \
>>>> +            fedora-38 \n \
>>>>                debian-11 \n \
>>>> -            opensuseleap-15.3 \n \
>>>>                almalinux-8.8 \n \
>>>>                "
>>>>    # add poky sanity bbclass
>>> I believe the convention for older releases should be to leave releases
>>> we tested upon at the time of the original release but add new ones
>>> we've started testing.
>>>
>>> It is unlikely Fedora 37 would stop working with the LTS even if we no
>>> longer test there.
>> Understood and remembered now, thanks!
>> I'll update my patches then.
>>
>> However, my plan is to propose a documentation patch that removes Fedora
>> 37 from the distributions we support. Even if we can go on testing old
>> distributions for several reasons (such Ubuntu 16.04 for quite long
>> after it was EOLed), it's hard to support distributions for which we
>> don't receive updates yet.
> I'd prefer to keep the list including the list of things tested when we
> originally released even if they have passed EoL.
>
> The reason why is that people quite likely do keep some of these
> systems around and run the stable release updates on them. If they do,
> they're going to get a message saying it is no longer supported. That
> is true to some extent but things will continue to work and I'd rather
> not "panic" them like that. Whether they should build on EoL systems is
> a matter of debate and their choice, not ours.


This makes perfect sense. Actually, that's what we're actually doing but 
I forgot, not doing this frequently enough:
https://docs.yoctoproject.org/ref-manual/system-requirements.html#supported-linux-distributions

Apologies! That's why I should have more notes for such things.

Thanks
Michael.


-- 
Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com