On Wed Oct 14 13:45:01 2015, jhi wrote: > Based on a discussion I had with the macports developers > > https://trac.macports.org/ticket/49273 > > I would recommend doing *something* about the current setup where we > set the binary backward compatibility to 10.3 (OS X is now at 10.11, > 10.4 was the first Intel release, 10.3 was still all PPC, we are > talking 2003 here) with > > ld="env MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET=10.3 ${ld}" > > See > https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/DeveloperTools/Conceptual/cross_development/Configuring/configuring.html > for the description of the binary compatibility settings. > > (In that macports ticket also other matters are discussed, but since I > found experts, I asked them about the deployment target setting.) > > What happens is something on a lower deployment target attempts to run > a binary built on a higher deployment target, it will simply fail to > run at all. > > For some of previous discussions (as in: please read them to avoid > repeating the same discussions too much) see > > https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=117433 > > https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=123985 > > http://markmail.org/message/yoxutk5dfbu4r6ga#query:+page:1+mid:n5cbiz2dmpfmrwp2+state:results > > I am boldly CCing some of the people from the above. > > Previously, I have leaned on the side of backward compatibility, in > other words, doing nothing. > > But now I'm starting to lean towards doing ... something. The 10.3 is > definitely getting old. In the macports ticket they suggest 10.4 at > the minimum if PPC is really still a goal. But 10.6 preferably. Or > if we want more modern nice linker things, 10.7. (I am guessing there > might also be some nicer compiler things, not just linker.) > > So if compiled without anything, one gets whatever target the current > tool chain uses. (And that then won't run on older boxes.) > > How about something like following: if the person configuring somehow > explicitly asks for an older deployment target, then and only then we > set the linker to that target. If they do not, we will compile > without any specific setting, getting all the modernity benefits. > > How the explicit asking might work? I have two ideas: (1) if there is > environment variable MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET set, use that ... this > is kind of blindingly obvious extension of the old way (2) Configure > option/variable, -Dusesomething -- though I'm a little leery of a very > OS-specific Configure option. Jarkko: How would this patch: https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Attachment/1332434/711615/0002-very-first-step-to-tidy-up-mess-around-sdk-to-use.patch ... which is from https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=123831 and which Tony Cook and I were discussing last night in #p5p affect this issue? Thank you very much. -- James E Keenan (jkeenan@cpan.org) --- via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: new https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=126360Thread Previous | Thread Next