[OS X TeX] Threads on MacIntel
Bruno Voisin
bvoisin at mac.com
Fri Jun 10 17:37:41 CEST 2005
Le 10 juin 05 à 17:06, Jonathan Kew a écrit :
> However, this isn't really necessary (depending on the overall
> setup). Consider the output of
>
> $ which tex
>
> which, on my machine, responds
>
> /usr/local/teTeX/bin/powerpc-apple-darwin-current/tex
>
> Note the path. If I were on an Intel Mac, the "powerpc" part would
> be replaced by "i686" or something. So the binaries would be
> separate anyway. The two architectures can co-exist in a single
> filesystem even without universal binaries, by appropriate PATH
> configuration, etc.
As far as I understood, the powerpc here in the path (and more
generally the imbrication of directories) was Gerben's decision, not
something imposed by TeX or OS X in itself. Or did I misunderstand?
So what you're saying is that i-Installer (or whichever installer is
used for gwTeX at the time MacTel Macs are released) should detect,
at install time, the processor and determine the binaries to be
installed (ie chooses then between two directories bin/i686-apple-
darwin-current/ and bin/powerpc-apple-darwin-current/, both included
inside the i-Package). Would'nt it be simpler to have universal
binaries?
It reminds me of the 68k -> PowerPC transition (how old I feel by
writing this!), when installers generally gave the choice between 68k
binaries, or PowerPC binaries, or fat binaries running on both
processors.
>> For OS X front-ends, making sure that they use Cocoa fully would
>> go a long way to ensure portability.
>
> Those who have been at WWDC this week are, of course, constrained
> by the usual NDA rules from saying much, but I think I can take the
> liberty of commenting that I see no reason to be concerned. :)
Do you mean here that the info given to developers at the WWDC is
covered by the NDA? I thought all that info was public, given the
WWDC is a public conference, a bit like a showcase; and that the NDA
applied only to prerelease software (like Tiger, the software
updates, etc.), got by the developers from the ADC, until the
software was released officially.
Similarly I was puzzled, when downloading and installing Xcode 2.1
this week (not that I use it for coding actually!), to see a mention
of NDA on the web download page (after entering my ADC login and
password). I thought there was nothing secret in Xcode 2.1, that it
was public.
So I imagine all the developers who buy a Transition Kit from Apple
will also have to sign a NDA?
Bruno Voisin--------------------- Info ---------------------
Mac-TeX Website: http://www.esm.psu.edu/mac-tex/
& FAQ: http://latex.yauh.de/faq/
TeX FAQ: http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq
List Post: <mailto:MacOSX-TeX at email.esm.psu.edu>
More information about the macostex-archives
mailing list