Closed
Bug 1322646
Opened 8 years ago
Closed 8 years ago
Bump subsystem version to 6.01 to block Firefox from running on Windows XP/2003/Vista
Categories
(Firefox Build System :: General, defect)
Tracking
(firefox52 wontfix, firefox53 fixed)
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla53
People
(Reporter: emk, Unassigned)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
Bug 1322646 - Bump subsystem version to 6.01 to block Firefox from running on Windows XP/2003/Vista.
58 bytes,
text/x-review-board-request
|
glandium
:
review+
|
Details |
to unblock some bugs that will break WinXP.
Reporter | ||
Updated•8 years ago
|
Comment hidden (mozreview-request) |
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•8 years ago
|
||
Note: crashtest failures are unrelated to this bug (see bug 1319318).
Reporter | ||
Comment 3•8 years ago
|
||
Also, MozReview claims 3 failures from excluded jobs due to bug 1321953.
With utmost respect, why can you not let Nightly-53.0a1 die a dignified death under Vista SP2?
For starters, VistaSP2 != WinXP, but rather VistaSP2 ~ Win7; you may have already modified
"firefox-53.0a1.en-US.win32.installer.exe" so as to not install on Vista (last one that does is
for BuildID=20161122030216), but I'll have you know that every single "zip" version since then
has been running flawlessly on VistaSP2; here's a shot from latest one at the time of posting:
http://i.imgur.com/4TEK8OX.jpg
I realise that further down the 53.0a1 cycle you may introduce code that is truly
incompatible with Vista (e.g. one that makes API calls to functions not present in the
Vista kernel, or some other type of incompatibility), but then it would be death by
natural causes; artificially disabling Fx-53.0a1 beforehand, denying it the ability
to even try to run, is not "killing" Vista support, but "murdering" it before its time...
I bet you if you set subsystem version to 6.00 you'll be able to "unblock your bugs
that will break WinXP", but at the same time allow advanced users/testers on Vista to
enjoy Nightly for (much?) longer...
And despite all that's been posted already, I still can't grasp the reason XP and Vista
were put together on the same sinking ship :-(
Comment 5•8 years ago
|
||
AFAIK no official decision has been made with regards to dropping XP support. While I appreciate the eagerness to code these patches so they are ready for when we do, given the velocity of changes to the build system lately (especially configure), I think it's best to hold off reviewing them.
(In reply to Gregory Szorc [:gps] from comment #5)
> AFAIK no official decision has been made with regards to dropping XP support.
Hello Gregory; AFAYK? Let me bring you up to speed:
bug 1130266
bug 1303827
bug 1315083
bug 1310836
bug 1312085
bug 1315153
bug 1305453
bug 1317569
bug 1317716
bug 1317780
bug 1318025
bug 1318671
bug 1318920
bug 1318921
bug 1318922
bug 1319162
bug 1319164
bug 1319167
and possibly many more that I am not aware of :-( . What pains me the most is that even
in this case, you (Mozilla Organization) had to ape Google Chrome in every single aspect
and carry VistaSP2 along with XP; you do have a fancy name for that, too, it's called
"chrome parity" !
I begin to sound as if I am ranting, I know better than that, so apologies...
Comment 7•8 years ago
|
||
pdol: can you please give guidance for build system support for various Windows versions? We need to know which versions of Windows we're expected to support in mozilla-central.
Flags: needinfo?(pdolanjski)
Reporter | ||
Comment 8•8 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Gregory Szorc [:gps] from comment #5)
> AFAIK no official decision has been made with regards to dropping XP
> support.
What is the definition of "official decision"? The system requirements page already says "From Firefox 53 planned for April 2017, Windows XP/Vista/Server 2008 are no longer supported."
Comment 9•8 years ago
|
||
I was looking for a mailing list or blog post outlining things. But from all the other linked bugs, it's apparent change is happening. I just need to know what support (if any) the build system needs to retain for XP. And pdol can answer that.
Comment 10•8 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Gregory Szorc [:gps] from comment #9)
> I was looking for a mailing list or blog post outlining things.
Please read
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.platform/W6pUpP_FbZY
Comment 11•8 years ago
|
||
The first post says "tentative" and https://chuttenblog.wordpress.com/2016/10/28/firefox-windows-xp-exit-plan/ says "pending approval." This language doesn't meet my standards for action to nuke all XP support from the build system. I have a trust anchor in bsmedberg and he says to ask pdol. So that's what I've done.
Comment 12•8 years ago
|
||
Sorry for the lack of an official answer (just waiting on a blog post to be published).
The answer is that XP/Vista users will definitively be moved to ESR52 and will be supported until September, 2017 at a minimum on that branch.
Flags: needinfo?(pdolanjski)
Reporter | ||
Comment 13•8 years ago
|
||
So the build system does not have to support XP/Vista at all on mozilla-central (currently 53). Let's move forward.
Comment 14•8 years ago
|
||
If other parts of Firefox/Gecko are explicitly dropping compatibility with XP/Vista, then it makes no sense for the build system to retain support for XP/Vista. If this assumption about others parts of Firefox/Gecko is true, then my opinion as build module owner is we should remove all build system code related to supporting XP/Vista.
Reporter | ||
Comment 15•8 years ago
|
||
I'm going to add changes to drop compatibility. But many of them require build system changes (bug 1317569 and 1318025, for example). And :glandium said we should not add such changes until at least this bug is fixed. Circular dependence :(
Reporter | ||
Comment 16•8 years ago
|
||
Bug 1324183 has landed (that is, dom/media, a part of Firefox/Gecko explicitly dropped the compatibility with XP/Vista). Already one person complained about that Nightly broke on an anyway-unsupported platform (see bug 1324183 comment #15). We should not pretend to passively "support" XP/Vista any longer.
Flags: needinfo?(mh+mozilla)
Comment 17•8 years ago
|
||
mozreview-review |
Comment on attachment 8817625 [details]
Bug 1322646 - Bump subsystem version to 6.01 to block Firefox from running on Windows XP/2003/Vista.
https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/97848/#review100558
Attachment #8817625 -
Flags: review?(mh+mozilla) → review+
Updated•8 years ago
|
Flags: needinfo?(mh+mozilla)
Comment 18•8 years ago
|
||
Pushed by mh@glandium.org:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/b354f4a88fe1
Bump subsystem version to 6.01 to block Firefox from running on Windows XP/2003/Vista. r=glandium
Comment 19•8 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 8 years ago
status-firefox53:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla53
Comment 20•8 years ago
|
||
Masatoshi, what is the user experience when a Windows XP or Vista user tries to run a firefox.exe build with subsystem version 6.01?
status-firefox52:
--- → wontfix
Flags: needinfo?(VYV03354)
Reporter | ||
Comment 21•8 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Chris Peterson [:cpeterson] from comment #20)
> Masatoshi, what is the user experience when a Windows XP or Vista user tries
> to run a firefox.exe build with subsystem version 6.01?
A message box will be shown with the following message:
"<C:\path\to\exe>\firefox.exe is not a valid Win32 application."
(<C:\path\to\exe> is an install location.)
Flags: needinfo?(VYV03354)
Comment 22•8 years ago
|
||
Will this impact machines that are running Firefox in compatibility mode? If so, do we know how many users on supported machines have compatibility mode enabled and have it set to a now unsupported Windows version?
FWIW, when I deployed a Firefox update hotfix extensions ~2.5 years ago, 0.7% of users had compatibility mode enabled (https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/firefox-dev/2014-July/001997.html). Unfortunately, I'm not sure which Windows versions(s) those were set to or if the data is still around or valid.
It /might/ be worth conducting a metrics experiment to see how many Windows 7+ users may inadvertently lose Firefox access if this commit locks out compatibility mode users.
needinfo bsmedberg so he's aware of the potential issue. (Someone please cancel it if this change doesn't impact compatibility mode.)
Flags: needinfo?(benjamin)
Reporter | ||
Comment 23•8 years ago
|
||
No, compatibility mode does not affect Windows loader. I verified the latest Nightly run with compatibility mode enabled on Windows 7 and Windows 10.
Flags: needinfo?(benjamin)
Updated•7 years ago
|
Product: Core → Firefox Build System
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•