gitian: Remove Windows 32 bit build #15939

pull MarcoFalke wants to merge 2 commits into bitcoin:master from MarcoFalke:1904-GitianWin changing 8 files +2 −59
  1. MarcoFalke commented at 12:41 pm on May 2, 2019: member
    The Windows 32 bit build has been removed from https://bitcoincore.org/en/download/, so unless there are complaints, we don’t need to build it even
  2. MarcoFalke added the label Needs gitian build on May 2, 2019
  3. MarcoFalke added the label Build system on May 2, 2019
  4. in contrib/gitian-descriptors/gitian-win.yml:34 in faf0443096 outdated 
    30@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ script: |
31   set -e -o pipefail
32 
33   WRAP_DIR=$HOME/wrapped
34-  HOSTS="i686-w64-mingw32 x86_64-w64-mingw32"
35+  HOSTS="x86_64-w64-mingw32"
    luke-jr commented at 12:42 pm on May 2, 2019:
    This looks so bare. Almost makes me want to build a PPC64 Windows binary just for the sake of it. :)
    MarcoFalke commented at 12:58 pm on May 2, 2019:
    Can you install windows on ppc even?
    luke-jr commented at 6:15 pm on May 2, 2019:
    NT4 :p
    davehamiltone commented at 6:57 pm on May 3, 2019:
    o dear I have been running bitcoin core on a 32-bit windows system for a few years now. Am I the last one? I’d like to upgrade to 0.18 please. Any chance of having 32-bit windows back, or is it too much bother?
    luke-jr commented at 12:25 pm on May 6, 2019:
    Why can’t you use the 64-bit build?
    jeffrade commented at 7:27 pm on May 9, 2019:
    I’ll defer to someone who knows more than me, but can a 64-bit build run on a 32-bit machine?
  5. practicalswift commented at 1:05 pm on May 2, 2019: contributor
    Concept ACK
  6. laanwj commented at 1:55 pm on May 2, 2019: member
    even in the unlikely case that we decide to restore it for 0.18, I think removing it for 0.19 is non-controversial utACK faf04430963cb991f730e83d9a66474b6a93967a
  7. DrahtBot commented at 3:33 pm on May 2, 2019: member

    The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

    Conflicts

    Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

    • #15068 (Install icon & .desktop file to XDG data by luke-jr)

    If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

  8. achow101 commented at 4:57 pm on May 2, 2019: member
    utACK faf04430963cb991f730e83d9a66474b6a93967a
  9. MarcoFalke added this to the milestone 0.19.0 on May 2, 2019
  10. practicalswift commented at 7:26 am on May 3, 2019: contributor
    utACK faf04430963cb991f730e83d9a66474b6a93967a
  11. DrahtBot removed the label Needs gitian build on May 3, 2019
  12. MarcoFalke added the label Needs gitian build on May 3, 2019
  13. Remove Windows 32 bit build faf666f814
  14. MarcoFalke force-pushed on May 3, 2019
  15. MarcoFalke commented at 5:42 pm on May 3, 2019: member
    Removed it from depends and travis as well
  16. fanquake commented at 2:42 am on May 6, 2019: member
    Concept ACK
  17. laanwj commented at 9:58 am on May 6, 2019: member

    This was bound to be a somewhat controversial decision: however one architecture per platform is great for maintenance-heavy outlier platforms such as Windows (and MacOSX). This allows for more focus in testing and, and hopefully a better user experience and better security, in time. Cross-compilation to windows is fraught with some risks, and they’re minimized by only having one toolchain (mingw-w64) to check.

    If you need a wider range of architectures it’s better to stick with Linux, or one of the BSDs. Another option is to use a VM. I was about to suggest WSL, but there’s no 32-bit support either!

  18. luke-jr commented at 12:27 pm on May 6, 2019: member
    I do think we should keep the Travis job around…
  19. DrahtBot commented at 7:25 pm on May 6, 2019: member

    Gitian builds for commit d7d7d315060620446bd363ca50f95f79d3260db7 (master):

    Gitian builds for commit d102d5df176068bfe5f6cf5bb09eeebaad6c27da (master and this pull):

  20. DrahtBot removed the label Needs gitian build on May 6, 2019
  21. MarcoFalke deleted a comment on May 6, 2019
  23. doc: Remove win32 from the release process fa193dc8e6
  24. MarcoFalke commented at 3:48 pm on May 8, 2019: member
    Thanks, done
  25. MarcoFalke added the label Needs gitian build on May 8, 2019
  26. MarcoFalke removed the label Needs gitian build on May 8, 2019
  27. in .travis.yml:109 in fa193dc8e6 
    104-        DPKG_ADD_ARCH="i386"
105-        PACKAGES="python3 nsis g++-mingw-w64-i686 wine-binfmt wine32"
106-        RUN_FUNCTIONAL_TESTS=false
107-        GOAL="deploy"
108-        BITCOIN_CONFIG="--enable-reduce-exports --disable-gui-tests"
109-
    luke-jr commented at 4:29 pm on May 8, 2019:
    Let’s keep the Travis job…
    MarcoFalke commented at 5:09 pm on May 8, 2019:
    Why? I am not aware that this job ever failed and the win64 one didn’t. Also, why would we want to waste resources on testing a target that we never ship? I’d rather have freebsd tests than a win32 one.
    luke-jr commented at 5:15 pm on May 8, 2019:
    We ship source code.
    MarcoFalke commented at 5:23 pm on May 8, 2019:
    It is the responsibility of the user to run the tests. You could argue that many users don’t run the tests on their target when they download the gitian binaries, but that doesn’t apply here. If some users compile on their own, they need to run the tests themselves.
    luke-jr commented at 5:26 pm on May 8, 2019:
    Travis doesn’t exist to run the tests. It exists to help us developers avoid doing things that will break the tests. (Running the tests is just how we accomplish that.)
    MarcoFalke commented at 5:40 pm on May 8, 2019:
    Either we support win32, test and ship it, or we don’t. There is no in-between.
    luke-jr commented at 6:00 pm on May 8, 2019:

    I do not agree. We support plenty of things we do not recommend or ship binaries for.

    Indeed, the best approach is to compile yourself, which itself falls outside the “ship” scope.

    sdaftuar commented at 6:51 pm on May 8, 2019:
    FWIW I agree with @MarcoFalke here – seems like not a great use of travis resources to explicitly test a platform that we’re no longer interested in continuing to support (who will debug problems if they are found?). On top of that, reducing the load on travis has benefits; I’ve noticed that the time I wait from updating a PR to having the travis jobs complete has ticked up recently. So I’d rather we not spend those travis cycles on win32 unless it was an important platform to test on for some reason, and the decision to drop it strikes me as a statement that it’s not.
    luke-jr commented at 3:09 am on May 9, 2019:

    The decision not to provide binaries isn’t necessarily a decision to drop support.

    (That being said, I certainly am not interested in providing support, so if nobody else is either…)

  28. luke-jr changes_requested
  29. fanquake commented at 2:34 am on May 9, 2019: member

    utACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15939/commits/fa193dc8e6f3b96fa2dba2f1c1668f7720fed320

    I agree with @MarcoFalke & @sdaftuar about Travis. I don’t think we should have a job dedicated to a binary we aren’t shipping.

  30. laanwj commented at 7:19 pm on May 9, 2019: member
    utACK fa193dc8e6f3b96fa2dba2f1c1668f7720fed320
  31. laanwj merged this on May 9, 2019
  32. laanwj closed this on May 9, 2019
  33. laanwj referenced this in commit 79046d5749 on May 9, 2019
  34. MarcoFalke deleted the branch on May 9, 2019
  35. sidhujag referenced this in commit 0a40ff2543 on May 10, 2019
  36. random-zebra referenced this in commit 586a051c7f on Feb 17, 2020
  37. deadalnix referenced this in commit 52cbaca6ae on Apr 1, 2020
  38. luke-jr referenced this in commit 16570d9001 on Jun 9, 2020
  39. wqking referenced this in commit 1c2a0f25d5 on Jul 30, 2020
  40. ftrader referenced this in commit db8211206d on Aug 17, 2020
  41. luke-jr referenced this in commit 6b18f76af7 on Nov 17, 2020
  42. luke-jr referenced this in commit 1200b5cc39 on Nov 25, 2020
  43. UdjinM6 referenced this in commit d703a5cdce on Sep 1, 2021
  44. UdjinM6 referenced this in commit 311b8d427d on Sep 2, 2021
  45. UdjinM6 referenced this in commit 2bb7b489b5 on Sep 2, 2021
  46. UdjinM6 referenced this in commit 614e62f585 on Sep 2, 2021
  47. UdjinM6 referenced this in commit 07a7fda225 on Sep 2, 2021
  48. fanquake referenced this in commit 5c0f46ca46 on Sep 11, 2021
  49. luke-jr referenced this in commit 0c99953b0f on Oct 6, 2021
  50. luke-jr referenced this in commit 32d35f6c96 on Oct 17, 2021
  51. DrahtBot locked this on Dec 16, 2021


MarcoFalke luke-jr davehamiltone jeffrade practicalswift laanwj DrahtBot achow101 fanquake sdaftuar

Labels
Build system

Milestone
0.19.0

github-metadata-mirror

This is a metadata mirror of the GitHub repository bitcoin/bitcoin. This site is not affiliated with GitHub. Content is generated from a GitHub metadata backup.
generated: 2024-12-19 03:12 UTC
This site is hosted by @0xB10C
More mirrored repositories can be found on mirror.b10c.me