Dennis Clarke writes:
> > Eric Botcazou <ebotca...@adacore.com> writes:
> >
> >> > I was looking through the gcc-4.5 primary and secondary platform list
> >> > to ensure we have coverage for MPC testing. It occurs to me that some
> >> > of the OS versions are outdated.
> >> >
> >> > I've included the list from the page
> >> > http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.5/criteria.html
> >> >
> >> > Should we update:
> >> >
> >> > 1. solaris2.10 -> 2.11
> >>
> >> Why move to a not-yet-released version?
> >
> > Indeed: while I regularly test on Solaris 11/SPARC at the moment, it's
> > still so much of a moving target that this doesn't make any sense.
>
> The issue may be one of "de facto" vs "defined as being" released.
>
> There is no such thing as a released Solaris revision that responds to
> uname with SunOS5.11 yet. When Sun/Oracle actually releases something AND
> you can buy a support contract for it then you have a valid platform in
> commercial use.
You can get support for the OpenSolaris distribution if you like, yet this
is still very much work in progress, not a stable platform we can rely on.
> Having said that .. I see roughly 30% of all my traffic from SunOS5.11
> users on either Solaris Nevada or OpenSolaris beta releases.
>
> The question should be ... do we in the community end user world see
> SunOS5.11 as being a de facto release? I would say yes.
Certainly not, even if it is widely used (primarily on laptops, I suppose).
> Solaris 10 is the enterprise class commercial grade Solaris release and it
> is staying put for a long long long time yet.
Indeed, and even if we chose sparc-sun-solaris2.10 as the primary platform
doesn't mean that *-*-solaris2.11 doesn't work, quite the contrary: I
regularly test both and try to keep them working.
Rainer
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
