[PD-dev] Mac SDK version for externals

[Dan Wilcox]

Also, if you're targeting C++11, I think you'll have to use a min of at least 10.7 (from https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7482026/can-i-use-the-latest-features-of-c11-in-xcode-4-or-osx-lion <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7482026/can-i-use-the-latest-features-of-c11-in-xcode-4-or-osx-lion>).

One thing we've noticed is that Pd builds on my machine running 10.13 don't seems to work on 10.6-10.7 systems, so the deployment target is really a suggestion at best. You'll have to do some testing but it's hard to hit *everyone* and honestly the vast majority of users fall within the newest to maybe 3 versions before anyway (ie. 10.10 - 10.13 now).

For plain C/C++, you can have a relatively old deployment target. It's really more important for macOS app development using the Apple frameworks ie. stuff like the changes from QT to AVFoundation, etc.

> On Mar 19, 2018, at 10:07 PM, Dan Wilcox <danomatika at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> The compiler builds for the current system by default. You have to set the min deployment target when building.
> 
> Add this flag to you makefile: --mmacosx-version-min=10.6
> 
> The current version for Pd is 10.6 which is the first version that supported i386 (ie. Intel processors).
> 
>> On Mar 19, 2018, at 12:00 PM, pd-dev-request at lists.iem.at <mailto:pd-dev-request at lists.iem.at> wrote:
>> 
>> From: Miller Puckette <msp at ucsd.edu <mailto:msp at ucsd.edu>>
>> To: Alex <x37v.alex at gmail.com <mailto:x37v.alex at gmail.com>>
>> Cc: pd-dev <pd-dev at lists.iem.at <mailto:pd-dev at lists.iem.at>>
>> Subject: Re: [PD-dev] Mac SDK version for externals
>> Message-ID: <20180319015755.GY7620 at elroy.localdomain <mailto:20180319015755.GY7620 at elroy.localdomain>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>> 
>> This is a very interesting and useful question.
>> 
>> At the outset of PD I only worried about having it run on the "current"
>> platforms: Redhat 5.2, Windows 95, and when it arrived, MacOS 10.2.  Older
>> platforms weren't important.
>> 
>> Since then I've tried to keep back compatibility to whatever those bleeding-edge
>> OSes were, because I assume people can't always afford machine upgrades.  But
>> I haven't tried to extend Pd (Or "extra" objects) backward past the original
>> dates.
>> 
>> At the moment I can only compile back to OSX 10.5 (PPC) and Windows XP; I
>> don't have real or virtual machines that go back further.
>> 
>> So my suggestion would be: make it work on today's OSes, and try to keep it
>> alive on them, but don't worry too hard about older ones.  I don't think I'm
>> ever going to be tempted to compile Pd for Windows 3.1.
>> 
>> cheers
>> Miller
> 
> --------
> Dan Wilcox
> @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika>
> danomatika.com <http://danomatika.com/>
> robotcowboy.com <http://robotcowboy.com/>
> 
> 
> 

--------
Dan Wilcox
@danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika>
danomatika.com <http://danomatika.com/>
robotcowboy.com <http://robotcowboy.com/>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20180319/4ce0209c/attachment-0001.html>