doc: add supported platforms list #8922

rvagg · 2016-10-04T09:55:01Z

Continuing on from nodejs/build#488 (comment), this was punted to the Build WG a month or so ago, the Build WG came up with the list, tossed up the proposal last week, got some feedback and here it is for the CTC to consider now. On the agenda for this week's @nodejs/ctc meeting.

rvagg · 2016-10-04T09:58:01Z

I should note that this is targeting v6, we can tweak for v7 if need be (I'm not sure it's any different) but it will need to be changed when backporting to v4.

claudiorodriguez

LGTM with just some tiny copyedit nits

claudiorodriguez · 2016-10-04T10:01:53Z

BUILDING.md

+
+### Input
+
+We rely on a few dependencies that _makes us who we are—most importantly V8 and libuv. We therefore need to adopt their supported platforms and potentially add to their lists based on test and/or release coverage.


Micro nits

_makes -> make (remove underscore, go singular)

who we are-most -> who we are - most (spacing)

I'd prefer this to be more direct. Maybe just:

We rely on V8 and libuv. We therefore adopt their supported platforms as a starting point.

Or whatever is accurate.

Agreed that this should be clarified. Its easy to understand that we should be a subset of the platforms supported by the dependencies. Maybe:

We rely on V8 and libuv. We therefore support of subset of their supported platforms.

Syntax error on this line.

Nibbler999 · 2016-10-04T10:05:00Z

BUILDING.md

+
+### Shared libraries & dependencies
+
+Node.js intends to support building against shared representations of dependencies found found in the [*deps*][./deps/] directory.


"found found"

mhdawson · 2016-10-05T20:26:07Z

LGTM subject to fixing the Input section and the other nits mentioned by others.

jbergstroem · 2016-10-05T20:42:38Z

Seeing how we now test (green) smartos14 through 16 I'm inclined moving 15,16 off experimental.

rvagg · 2016-10-05T20:43:37Z

No CTC objections, need to fix up the "Input" section to clarify what it's supposed to mean.

jasnell · 2016-10-06T18:09:18Z

LGTM with the few nits addressed.

ChALkeR · 2016-10-12T16:26:18Z

BUILDING.md

+| GNU/Linux    | Tier 2       | kernel >= 3.10, glibc >= 2.17    | s390x                |                  |
+| macOS        | Experimental | >= 10.8 < 10.10                  | x64                  | no test coverage |
+| SmartOS      | Experimental | >= 15                            | x86, x64             |                  |
+| Linux (musl) | Experimental | musl >= 1.0                      | x64                  |                  |


mhdawson · 2016-11-10T13:45:24Z

@rvagg is it ok if I land this ? I have a change I'd like to make but at this point probably best to PR once it lands.

mhdawson · 2016-11-10T13:47:45Z

BUILDING.md

+| FreeBSD      | Tier 2       | >= 10                            | x64                  |                  |
+| GNU/Linux    | Tier 2       | kernel >= 4.2.0, glibc >= 2.19   | ppc64be              |                  |
+| GNU/Linux    | Tier 2       | kernel >= 3.13.0, glibc >= 2.19  | ppc64le              |                  |
+| AIX          | Tier 2       | >= 6.1                           | ppc64be              |                  |


mhdawson · 2016-11-10T13:48:41Z

I see there are still changes that need to be incorporated so instead of looking to land added my requested change as an additional line comment

Trott · 2016-12-22T15:32:19Z

Bump! We should really get this info published. @rvagg Do you have the bandwidth to fix up the handful of nits on this?(Maybe consider landing as-is and people can submit their own PRs to fix up the nits?

Trott · 2017-02-19T16:21:45Z

bumping again....

rvagg · 2017-02-20T03:17:47Z

fixed most nits, ptal @Trott @jbergstroem @mhdawson @claudiorodriguez @ChALkeR @Nibbler999

@ChALkeR: re musl kernel version, do you have a suggestion because my thought is just "whatever kernel version you're using with musl!" i.e. assuming musl is the lowest common denominator so kernel doesn't need to be specified.

sorry for the big delay, I went looking for this list in our codebase to reference for someone and couldn't find it and eventually found this PR I'd been neglecting!

Nibbler999 · 2017-02-20T09:46:10Z

BUILDING.md

 | FreeBSD      | Tier 2       | >= 10                            | x64                  |                  |
 | GNU/Linux    | Tier 2       | kernel >= 4.2.0, glibc >= 2.19   | ppc64be              |                  |
 | GNU/Linux    | Tier 2       | kernel >= 3.13.0, glibc >= 2.19  | ppc64le              |                  |
-| AIX          | Tier 2       | >= 6.1                           | ppc64be              |                  |
+| AIX          | Tier 2       | >= >= 6.1 TL09                   | ppc64be              |                  |


Duplicate >=

thanks, fixed

jbergstroem · 2017-02-21T12:21:46Z

Smartos needs to be >= 15

jbergstroem · 2017-02-21T12:23:31Z

@bnoordhuis: do we also change gcc to 4.8.5?

misterdjules · 2017-02-21T21:19:46Z

I'm discussing SmartOS build and runtime requirements in nodejs/build#628. As a result, it's possible that I'll need to submit an update to this table soon.

One change that might be safe to make at this point for SmartOS is to update the Version column as following:

>= 14 < 16.4

and add the following in the Notes column:

The gcc4.8-libs package needs to be installed, because node binaries have been built with GCC 4.8, for which runtime libraries are not installed by default. For these node versions, the recommended binaries are the ones available in pkgsrc, not the one available from nodejs.org. Note that the binaries downloaded from the pkgsrc repositories are not officially supported by the Node.js project, and instead are supported by Joyent. SmartOS images >= 16.4 are not supported because GCC 4.8 runtime libraries are not available in their pkgsrc repository

@jbergstroem What do you think?

I'm fine with submitting a follow-up PR as soon as the discussion in nodejs/build#628 reaches consensus though.

mhdawson

LGTM

mhdawson · 2017-02-24T22:04:06Z

Other than @jbergstroem suggested changes I'd vote we land and then update as changes are required.

mhdawson · 2017-03-10T18:16:40Z

@rvagg we discussed in the last build meeting as wanting to land this sooner than later. I'm happy to grab and incorporate @jbergstroem comments. Or possibly I could just submit a PR against your repo with them?

gibfahn · 2017-03-13T15:35:20Z

cc/ @shellberg

shellberg · 2017-03-13T16:30:27Z

Thanks @gibfahn
In relation to the support position for AIX 6.1, it is now fast approaching the end of its 10 year 'standard' support cycle commitment. AIX 6.1 has long since been superceded by AIX 7; of which AIX 7.1 TL4 and AIX 7.2 TL1 represent the heads of their respective maintenance release streams.
It would appear that the proposed practical approach concerning support of the older OS levels is to revise the current highest supported tier level entry, and include/register an entry of the older OS level at a lower tier?

In which case, at tier 2, we should potentially revise the AIX position to ">= 7.1 TL3", and drop AIX 6.1 >=6.1 TL09 to a tier 3/experimental status, since it will continue to build and pass tests as it does today and continues to be a legitimate build target; but it may prove harder to maintain the community CI/test infrastructure going forward and the emphasis should reasonably switch to AIX 7.1 (or later) capabilities for 'master' and future 'current' releases.
(As it is, AIX 6.1 needs the 4.8 GCC compilers/toolchain installed for the minimum requisites of Node.js v4.x or 6.x.)

mhdawson · 2017-03-14T17:53:12Z

Internal discussion so far is that we need to continue to build on AIX 6.1 and support it for the rest of the life of Node version 4.X and Node version 6.X (despite official end of life customers can still get support and use it in some cases), but for Node version 8.x move the officially supported level up to 7.X. Since our build resources are limited that means leaving the builds as is for now, using AIX 6.1 but when we cut Node version 8 we will likely list 7.1 as the minimum level to allow us to change that later on in its lifespan.

mhdawson · 2017-03-15T22:25:24Z

I talked to Rod and he agreed I could take over getting this landed. Created new PR which I think addresses outstanding comments: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/11872/files. @jbergstroem, @misterdjules, @silverwind , @bnoordhuis , @claudiorodriguez , @ChALkeR, @Trott can you head over to review/comment there.

@ChALkeR, I'd suggest we address adding the kernel level if you think we need to list something for that in a follow on PR.

My goal is to get this landed so that when we branch for Node version we have something to PR changes specific to that release (for example moving support AIX level to 7.1+)

jasnell · 2017-03-24T22:25:47Z

Closing this in favor of the new stuff that has landed

rvagg added the ctc-agenda label Oct 4, 2016

nodejs-github-bot added the doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. label Oct 4, 2016

rvagg mentioned this pull request Oct 4, 2016

Create proposal for list of officially supported platforms nodejs/build#488

Closed

rvagg added the lts-watch-v4.x label Oct 4, 2016

claudiorodriguez approved these changes Oct 4, 2016

View reviewed changes

Nibbler999 reviewed Oct 4, 2016

View reviewed changes

targos mentioned this pull request Oct 7, 2016

SmartOS cannot build on master nodejs/v8#1

Closed

Trott mentioned this pull request Oct 11, 2016

Node.js Foundation Core Technical Committee (CTC) Meeting 2016-10-12 #9020

Closed

rvagg removed the ctc-agenda label Oct 12, 2016

ChALkeR reviewed Oct 12, 2016

View reviewed changes

mhdawson mentioned this pull request Oct 13, 2016

Update links for AIX and Linux on Z downloads nodejs/nodejs.org#940

Merged

rvagg force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from c133999 to 83c7a88 Compare October 18, 2016 17:02

mhdawson reviewed Nov 10, 2016

View reviewed changes

silverwind approved these changes Nov 18, 2016

View reviewed changes

retrohacker mentioned this pull request Dec 9, 2016

Use clang to build nodejs in alpine nodejs/docker-node#281

Closed

jbergstroem mentioned this pull request Dec 22, 2016

fedora 25! nodejs/build#579

Closed

gibfahn mentioned this pull request Dec 30, 2016

deps: update V8 to 5.5 #9618

Closed

2 tasks

rvagg added 2 commits February 20, 2017 14:09

doc: add supported platforms list

d883278

rebase & fix nits

a3564c5

rvagg force-pushed the supported-platforms branch from 81d59d2 to a3564c5 Compare February 20, 2017 03:16

Nibbler999 reviewed Feb 20, 2017

View reviewed changes

>=>=

665a4f3

jasnell approved these changes Feb 21, 2017

View reviewed changes

mhdawson approved these changes Feb 21, 2017

View reviewed changes

gibfahn mentioned this pull request Mar 7, 2017

Build WG meeting Mar 7 3 PM EST nodejs/build#640

Closed

gibfahn mentioned this pull request Mar 17, 2017

doc: add supported platforms list #11872

Closed

3 tasks

jasnell closed this Mar 24, 2017

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

doc: add supported platforms list #8922

doc: add supported platforms list #8922

rvagg commented Oct 4, 2016

rvagg commented Oct 4, 2016

claudiorodriguez left a comment

claudiorodriguez Oct 4, 2016

Trott Oct 4, 2016 •

edited

Loading

mhdawson Oct 5, 2016

ChALkeR Oct 12, 2016

Nibbler999 Oct 4, 2016

mhdawson commented Oct 5, 2016

jbergstroem commented Oct 5, 2016

rvagg commented Oct 5, 2016

jasnell commented Oct 6, 2016

ChALkeR Oct 12, 2016

mhdawson commented Nov 10, 2016

mhdawson Nov 10, 2016

mhdawson commented Nov 10, 2016 •

edited

Loading

Trott commented Dec 22, 2016

Trott commented Feb 19, 2017

rvagg commented Feb 20, 2017

Nibbler999 Feb 20, 2017

rvagg Feb 21, 2017

jbergstroem commented Feb 21, 2017

jbergstroem commented Feb 21, 2017

misterdjules commented Feb 21, 2017

mhdawson left a comment

mhdawson commented Feb 24, 2017

mhdawson commented Mar 10, 2017

gibfahn commented Mar 13, 2017

shellberg commented Mar 13, 2017

mhdawson commented Mar 14, 2017 •

edited

Loading

mhdawson commented Mar 15, 2017

jasnell commented Mar 24, 2017


		### Input

		We rely on a few dependencies that _makes us who we are—most importantly V8 and libuv. We therefore need to adopt their supported platforms and potentially add to their lists based on test and/or release coverage.


		### Shared libraries & dependencies

		Node.js intends to support building against shared representations of dependencies found found in the [deps][./deps/] directory.

doc: add supported platforms list #8922

doc: add supported platforms list #8922

Conversation

rvagg commented Oct 4, 2016

rvagg commented Oct 4, 2016

claudiorodriguez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Trott Oct 4, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mhdawson commented Oct 5, 2016

jbergstroem commented Oct 5, 2016

rvagg commented Oct 5, 2016

jasnell commented Oct 6, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mhdawson commented Nov 10, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mhdawson commented Nov 10, 2016 • edited Loading

Trott commented Dec 22, 2016

Trott commented Feb 19, 2017

rvagg commented Feb 20, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jbergstroem commented Feb 21, 2017

jbergstroem commented Feb 21, 2017

misterdjules commented Feb 21, 2017

mhdawson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mhdawson commented Feb 24, 2017

mhdawson commented Mar 10, 2017

gibfahn commented Mar 13, 2017

shellberg commented Mar 13, 2017

mhdawson commented Mar 14, 2017 • edited Loading

mhdawson commented Mar 15, 2017

jasnell commented Mar 24, 2017

Trott Oct 4, 2016 •

edited

Loading

mhdawson commented Nov 10, 2016 •

edited

Loading

mhdawson commented Mar 14, 2017 •

edited

Loading