Issue 100490044: code review 100490044: doc/go1.3.html: update the state of supported platforms (Closed)
Descriptiondoc/go1.3.html: update the state of supported platforms
Patch Set 1 : diff -r e2509b1f3a91 https://code.google.com/p/go #
Total comments: 1
Patch Set 2 : diff -r e2509b1f3a91 https://code.google.com/p/go #Patch Set 3 : diff -r c431c60edb20 https://code.google.com/p/go #
Total comments: 4
Patch Set 4 : diff -r c431c60edb20 https://code.google.com/p/go #Patch Set 5 : diff -r c431c60edb20 https://code.google.com/p/go #MessagesTotal messages: 20
Hello golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com (cc: golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com), I'd like you to review this change to https://code.google.com/p/go
Sign in to reply to this message.
https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044/diff/70001/doc/go1.3.html File doc/go1.3.html (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044/diff/70001/doc/go1.3.html#newcode96 doc/go1.3.html:96: Go 1.3 now includes experimental support for Solaris on the <code>amd64</code> (64-bit x86) architecture. Should we mention minimum platform support? People have complained to me in private that it didn't say the minimum OS version and they tried it on Solaris 10 and it didn't work. Minimum requirements are illumos or Solaris 11 systems.
Sign in to reply to this message.
On 2014/05/16 08:24:52, aram wrote: > Minimum requirements are illumos or Solaris 11 systems. thanks, will add tonight.
Sign in to reply to this message.
Hello golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com, aram@mgk.ro (cc: golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com), Please take another look.
Sign in to reply to this message.
Solaris bits are fine, leaving the rest for others.
Sign in to reply to this message.
> Solaris bits are fine, leaving the rest for others. On the same vein, perhaps we could mention the Plan 9 port requires the Tsemacquire syscall, which has been introduced on 2012-06-30. Not sure it's worth mentioning, however. -- David du Colombier
Sign in to reply to this message.
added On 2014/05/16 14:03:37, 0intro wrote: > > Solaris bits are fine, leaving the rest for others. > > On the same vein, perhaps we could mention the Plan 9 port requires > the Tsemacquire syscall, which has been introduced on 2012-06-30. Not > sure it's worth mentioning, however. > > -- > David du Colombier
Sign in to reply to this message.
R=r@golang.org (assigned by mikioh.mikioh@gmail.com)
Sign in to reply to this message.
https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044/diff/110001/doc/go1.3.html File doc/go1.3.html (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044/diff/110001/doc/go1.3.html#newcode94 doc/go1.3.html:94: As of Go 1.3, support for Go on Plan 9 requires the Tsemacquire syscall, which has been introduced on 2012-06-30. it's always required it. say, after the previous sentence in the same paragraph, It requires the <code>Tsemacquire</code> syscall, which has been in Plan 9 since June, 2012. https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044/diff/110001/doc/go1.3.html#newcode105 doc/go1.3.html:105: </p> similar here. something like (not sure about the actual meaning, just getting the words right): It uses illumos, equivalent to Solaris 11 or above.
Sign in to reply to this message.
ptal https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044/diff/110001/doc/go1.3.html File doc/go1.3.html (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044/diff/110001/doc/go1.3.html#newcode94 doc/go1.3.html:94: As of Go 1.3, support for Go on Plan 9 requires the Tsemacquire syscall, which has been introduced on 2012-06-30. On 2014/05/16 21:32:27, r wrote: > it's always required it. say, after the previous sentence in the same paragraph, > It requires the <code>Tsemacquire</code> syscall, which has been in Plan 9 since > June, 2012. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044/diff/110001/doc/go1.3.html#newcode105 doc/go1.3.html:105: </p> On 2014/05/16 21:32:27, r wrote: > similar here. something like (not sure about the actual meaning, just getting > the words right): > > It uses illumos, equivalent to Solaris 11 or above. Done.
Sign in to reply to this message.
LGTM from me but get someone to review who knows more about solaris
Sign in to reply to this message.
thanks. aram already had a look at this (13hrs ago). submitting. On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 6:49 AM, <r@golang.org> wrote: > LGTM from me but get someone to review who knows more about solaris > > https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044/
Sign in to reply to this message.
*** Submitted as https://code.google.com/p/go/source/detail?r=de3ae795999b *** doc/go1.3.html: update the state of supported platforms LGTM=r R=golang-codereviews, aram, 0intro, gobot, r CC=golang-codereviews https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044
Sign in to reply to this message.
On May 16, 2014 5:32 PM, <r@golang.org> wrote: > https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044/diff/110001/doc/go1.3.html#newcode94 > doc/go1.3.html:94: As of Go 1.3, support for Go on Plan 9 requires the > > Tsemacquire syscall, which has been introduced on 2012-06-30. > it's always required it. say, after the previous sentence in the same > paragraph, > It requires the <code>Tsemacquire</code> syscall, which has been in Plan > 9 since June, 2012. > > https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044/diff/110001/doc/go1.3.html#newcode105 > doc/go1.3.html:105: </p> > similar here. something like (not sure about the actual meaning, just > getting the words right): > > It uses illumos, equivalent to Solaris 11 or above. does this imply that illumos is equivalent to Solaris 11? because it's not actually. illumos is derived from Solaris 10, but there are sime incompatibility between it and Solaris 10, preventing us from support 10. but i think we can get 10 supported in 1.4.
Sign in to reply to this message.
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 6:59 AM, minux <minux.ma@gmail.com> wrote: >> It uses illumos, equivalent to Solaris 11 or above. > does this imply that illumos is equivalent to Solaris 11? i don't think so. i think it just mentions smartos, openindiana or other variants. but i'm not familiar with solaris. i'm happy if you can fix this.
Sign in to reply to this message.
Message was sent while issue was closed.
illumos is definitely closer to Solaris 11 than to Solaris 10, however they have diverged and are both different.
Sign in to reply to this message.
Can someone who knows please fix it? Mikio: This is why I asked you to hold off, but no big deal. -rob On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:35 PM, <aram@mgk.ro> wrote: > illumos is definitely closer to Solaris 11 than to Solaris 10, however > they have diverged and are both different. > > > https://codereview.appspot.com/100490044/
Sign in to reply to this message.
Message was sent while issue was closed.
I'm away from a computer where I can fix this at least until Monday, so maybe someone else can do it.
Sign in to reply to this message.
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Rob Pike <r@golang.org> wrote: > Mikio: This is why I asked you to hold off, but no big deal. you always have a good insight, sir. (・ω<)
Sign in to reply to this message.
Message was sent while issue was closed.
This CL appears to have broken the freebsd-arm-cheney builder. See http://build.golang.org/log/d79fe8bccd0a5ee54aa488b8baf07a6c177fb356
Sign in to reply to this message.
|
