Closed
Description
As discussed in #9495, it might be time to end our support for OS X 10.6.
I'm trying to find Apple's policy on supporting older versions of OS X, but it appears they haven't published anything publicly. (Which seems outrageous to me, but whatever.)
The major concern, I believe, is that OS X 10.6 is the newest version of OS X that runs on pre-EFI macs (or something?). I think @robpike actually has one of these old machines.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Type
Projects
Relationships
Development
No branches or pull requests
Activity
josharian commentedon Jan 5, 2015
FWIW, I also have a very old 10.6 machine around that I still use. However, I would be happy to just use 1.4 in perpetuity on that machine.
minux commentedon Jan 5, 2015
Having thought about this more, I think we probably should
announce the intention to remove support for 10.6 in Go 1.6
now, and make 1.5 the last version to support 10.6.
This will give 10.6 user enough time to migrate and also 1.5
is such a major leap. As 10.6 is supported now, supporting
it in 1.5 probably won't incur a lot of work for us.
bradfitz commentedon Jan 5, 2015
This isn't like we're dropping some old Linux version that people might still have in production. This is dropping support for an ancient desktop Mac, where Go 1.4 would continue to work.
minux commentedon Jan 5, 2015
I've sent an email to golang-nuts, let's see.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang-nuts/-ESF2OhZlBk
landonbjones commentedon Jan 5, 2015
This list of security updates, http://support.apple.com/en-us/HT1222, shows that last one for OS X 10.6 was 12 Sept 2013. It would be nice for Apple to say publicly that they are dropping support, but when there hasn't been a security update for over a year and known issues are out there I would consider support dropped.
sdouche commentedon Jan 5, 2015
From this link:
I'd say it's pragmatic to drop the N-5 version.
bradfitz commentedon Jan 8, 2015
Speaking of which, can we drop support for 32-bit OS X builds too? When was the last time Apple sold a 32-bit Mac?
Camlistore had to add a warning for Mac users because enough of them were finding themselves with a 32-bit Go installed on accident and then having problems, e.g. linking against a 64-bit sqlite.
josharian commentedon Jan 8, 2015
It's really useful to be able to do my 386 testing on my 64 bit OS X machine.
bradfitz commentedon Jan 8, 2015
That's valid.
But we can at least stop distributing builds from http://golang.org/dl/ if they're useless and misleading for almost everybody.
I'm fine with continuing to run a darwin-386 builder to keep it working for Go developer use cases.
bradfitz commentedon Jan 8, 2015
According to Twitter, it's been 7-8 years since Apple sold a 32-bit Mac: https://twitter.com/bradfitz/status/553298936832589825
bradfitz commentedon Jan 8, 2015
... which includes this wonderful table: http://www.everymac.com/mac-answers/snow-leopard-mac-os-x-faq/mac-os-x-snow-leopard-64-bit-macs-64-bit-efi-boot-in-64-bit-mode.html
griesemer commentedon Jan 8, 2015
+1 for being able to run 32bit binaries on the mac. I just used this this morning.
minux commentedon Jan 8, 2015
Not distributing 32-bit packages for Mac SGTM.
But please don't drop support for darwin/386.
(we need to consider 386 developers that use OS X)
IMHO, as long as Darwin still supports running 32-bit
programs, we should continue to support it.
bradfitz commentedon Jan 8, 2015
I only want to remove them from the downloads page.
6 remaining items
robpike commentedon Apr 11, 2015
I propose we don't explicitly unsupport it but don't worry about maintaining it. This is essentially the whole world's policy.
minux commentedon Apr 12, 2015
bradfitz commentedon Apr 12, 2015
They may be "passing", but in several cases that's just because they're skipping tests. It's the same reason that plan9 is "ok" on the dashboard.
minux commentedon Apr 12, 2015
rsc commentedon Apr 28, 2015
Rob and I discussed this, and we propose that for Go 1.5, we will say something along the lines of "The port to OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) is no longer actively maintained." That is, we won't go out of our way to delete it or break it, but we're also not going to make any attempt to keep it working or to fix issues specific to that version of OS X.
I should add that there are no plans to stop supporting GOARCH=386 on later versions of OS X, as long as OS X will run the resulting binaries. Being able to run a 32-bit toolchain on 64-bit x86 systems is too nice to give up without a fight.