On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 12:46 AM, Niall Douglas
On 7 May 2015 at 22:31, Vladimir Prus wrote:
Incidentally, feelings on XP support seem very muted this time round, with everyone agreeing we should drop it after the next Boost release. I admit surprise on the consensus.
That might be too early. I, for one, object to artificially removing support for XP, which is what you appear to propose. It's still an OS used by people, so it's reasonable for app developers to target it, and having boost.config error out on XP will be bad.
No, I'm saying individual libraries can refuse to build on XP if they choose after support is dropped.
Even if Boost.Build sets _WIN32_WINNT to 0x601 (Win7), it should be
Why 7 and not Vista?
the case that binaries still generally compile and work on XP. If a library uses a Vista or later API, then the DLL or EXE would refuse to load. If not, they should work fine.
What I'm suggesting is that notice is given that XP support is now down to each library maintainer's good wishes, and libraries are coming which won't support XP, and will never support XP.
I think XP should either be properly supported or it shouldn't be supported period. -- Olaf