Re: gettimeofday.c windows version?

[Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org>]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org>
> > Cc: bug-gnulib@gnu.org, rogerdpack@gmail.com
> > Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2022 17:20:07 +0100
> > 
> > > I think the code should use a run-time check regardless of the version
> > > of Windows on which the program was compiled.
> > 
> > But the value of _WIN32_WINNT is not the version *on* which the program was
> > compiled. It is the minimum version *for* which the program was compiled.
> > Both the INSTALL.windows of some GNU packages, as well as
> >  <https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/porting/modifying-winver-and-win32-winnt>,
> > say so. Maybe we should emphasize this in the install documentation even more?
> 
> I know all that.  But the issue here is different: if this file is
> compiled with _WIN32_WINNT lower than Windows 8, ...

We agree about this case.

The case here is (apparently) that someone compiled this file with
_WIN32_WINNT being ≥ _WIN32_WINNT_WIN8, and what to do then.

I have understood that your proposal is to still provide the ability to
run the binaries on older versions.

Whereas I continue to think that I'll better follow _WIN32_WINNT in the
sense that Microsoft specified ("which versions of Windows your code can
run on"). So that
  - The person who builds binaries has the choice between slim, optimized
    binaries and backward-compatible binaries,
  - It's clear which code to remove, when the time has come,
  - We have the same treatment than with other old cruft (e.g. HP-UX/m68k
    or DolphinOS) which I removed in 2020.

> My point is that there's a difference between when you stop
> _testing_ your code on some old platform, as opposed to when you
> deliberately break the build for that platform.  You want to do the
> latter; I'm saying do the former, and let people who use the old
> platform, such as they exist, test it for you and report problems.

I asked for the *right moment* to deliberately break supporting Windows 7.
I now know that your answer is "never", and hope I won't forget it for a
while.

> Why remove it?  Just because Microsoft decided to EOL those
> old systems?

- In order to reduce testing.
- In order to be honest about what we support vs. don't support.

Doing a web search, I now see from
<https://gs.statcounter.com/os-version-market-share/windows/desktop/worldwide>
that 10% of Windows users are still using Window 7. Whereas Windows XP
is below 1%.

Based on these numbers, I now think it's useful to continue supporting
Windows 7 — in the way you say, by replying to bug reports only —, whereas
removing support for Windows XP can be done earlier, as needed for maintenance.

Bruno