Skip to content

CreateSymbolicLinkW (and possibly others) are not supported in Windows XP #11950

Closed
@lifthrasiir

Description

@lifthrasiir
Contributor

A binary compiled with the recent master (or possibly much older master) and extern mod native; fails to run in Windows XP due to the missing symbols including CreateSymbolicLinkW, which are supported since Windows Vista. I don't have a working Windows XP environment at the moment so there might be more missing symbols. (I've received the report via some user with Windows XP.)

I'm not sure if it is intentional or not, but given that libuv has a check for the support, we at least need to determine whether to fix or not.

Activity

thestinger

thestinger commented on Jan 31, 2014

@thestinger
Contributor

According to the README, we only support Windows 7 and later. I've brought up the subject of whether we support Windows XP a few times and the consensus has been that we will not support it. Support ends on April 8th this year anyway.

lifthrasiir

lifthrasiir commented on Jan 31, 2014

@lifthrasiir
ContributorAuthor

@thestinger I don't think the README, as currently is, explicitly claims that non-"tier 1" platforms are not supported at all. Rather it is more like a different level of support, such that (say) we are willing to support Windows Vista but do not regularly test the master on it. We do not mention such "tier 2" platforms currently, which in my opinion should be made explicit at some point.

As a side note, you said the consensus and the consensus needs to be verified. I couldn't find any explicit decision to drop support for Windows XP in any of rust-dev archives (via Gmane), #rust and #rust-internals archives (via botbot.me) and Github issues. What I could found was as follows:

In light of this finding, I cannot say that there was a consensus at all. There are good reasons to support Windows XP (it will be around for some more years anyway) or not to support it (hurts the performance on newer platforms unless carefully engineered), but they are not the consensus.

Edit: Okay, I forgot to search the meetings and I think I've found some mention of the existence of "tier 2" platforms (and the fact that it includes Windows XP at the least).

thestinger

thestinger commented on Jan 31, 2014

@thestinger
Contributor

If you really want to add support for XP and drop it on April 8th, then we this can be a meeting issue again.

lifthrasiir

lifthrasiir commented on Jan 31, 2014

@lifthrasiir
ContributorAuthor

I think you misunderstood my comments. If "tier 2" platforms include Windows XP, then this issue should not be closed (but will be of low priority) no matter it hit the EOL or not. And 2014-04-08 is not the final EOL of Windows XP anyway (Windows XP Embedded receives the extended support til 2016-01-12).

thestinger

thestinger commented on Jan 31, 2014

@thestinger
Contributor

So if someone submits a pull request moving to a new Win32 API not available on XP, should it be rejected or accepted? There's a clear distinction between supporting it and not supporting it, regardless of a tier categorization.

lifthrasiir

lifthrasiir commented on Jan 31, 2014

@lifthrasiir
ContributorAuthor

That is the explicit consensus, which I believe (but am not very sure) that it's to reject such PR.

zr40

zr40 commented on Feb 1, 2014

@zr40
Contributor

I, for one, would not want an ancient and almost unsupported OS such as Windows XP to dictate the lowest common denominator of acceptable API usage.

adrientetar

adrientetar commented on Feb 1, 2014

@adrientetar
Contributor

@lifthrasiir Windows XP Embedded is not for Personal Computers.

brson

brson commented on Feb 1, 2014

@brson
Contributor

We can take patches to support XP, we just don't intend to make any promises about it, and supporting it shouldn't hinder design decisions. What are we relying on symbolic linking in windows for?

pnkfelix

pnkfelix commented on Feb 6, 2014

@pnkfelix
Member

Assigning P-low, not 1.0 blocker

thestinger

thestinger commented on Mar 12, 2014

@thestinger
Contributor

Duplicate of #12842.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    O-windowsOperating system: WindowsP-lowLow priority

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

        Participants

        @brson@pnkfelix@lifthrasiir@zr40@adrientetar

        Issue actions

          CreateSymbolicLinkW (and possibly others) are not supported in Windows XP · Issue #11950 · rust-lang/rust