← Back to context

Comment by Fulgen

13 hours ago

The problem is, as usual, that some people want that support, but nobody is actually interested in helping out with that support - and that doesn't only include people willing to help out with the code, it includes things like CI. Just how the riscv targets won't be able to reach tier 1 without GH or someone else offering CI support.

Rust's target tiers, while historically not as enforced as they are today, have requirements attached to them that each target has to fulfill; demoting a target or removing support isn't done for fun, but because of what the reality reflects. In Windows 7's case, support from the Tier 1 Windows target was not so much removed as it was acknowledged that the support guaranteees just didn't exist - host tools had long been dead with LLVM having removed support for running on Windows 7, and tier 1 support wasn't guaranteed without any CI to test it on. Thus support was removed, and very soon contributors popped up to maintain the win7 target which is tier 3 and accurately reflects the support gurantees of that target.

(Not a jab at your situation btw, and I wish I could offer you a solution beyond the win7 target - but as it's essentially the preexisting Windows 7 support extracted into a target that matched its reality, it works quite well in practice)

9 comments

Fulgen

Reply
duskdozer  12 hours ago

I do wonder how much support is removed because of genuine maintenance or compatibility burden, because I've encountered enough examples where it was done solely because some target was deemed "too old" arbitrarily, even if it would still work without any modifications.

  • s1mplicissimus  12 hours ago

    > even if it would still work without any modifications

    even in this case, maintenance burden is still real. supporting the old target often prevents you from using features/tools that make maintenance easier

  • Fulgen  2 hours ago

    In Rust or in general? Because an arbitrary "too old" moniker is not something I've seen happening, and the only target that was removed instead of demoted in recent times was i586-pc-windows-msvc, aka Windows 10 without SSE, which was...utterly pointless since Windows 10 requires SSE.

    If anything, I quite like the way Rust handles it with target tiers and easy switching between targets, because it's an honest approach about how well a target is supported. Having a win7 target that is tier 3 is a reflection of the support it has, and much better than stringing it along in the main Windows target that promises tested support when there isn't even a Windows 7 CI to test on.

  • TylerE  9 hours ago

    Perhaps the best example I can think of is the whole situation

    InstallShield is....massive crapware and actually generated 16 bit installers way way after anyone was using 16bit PCs. Nobody notices until, I think it was W8 or W10 dropped support for running 16bit executables (something about dropping the subsystem that supported them.