[PD] [PD-announce] Pd 0.52-2 released

Alexandre Torres Porres porres at gmail.com
Wed Mar 30 15:12:57 CEST 2022


Em qua., 30 de mar. de 2022 às 06:17, Dan Wilcox <danomatika at gmail.com>
escreveu:

> I don't understand your reasoning why "separate binaries make more sense."
> I don't recall the previous Pd & Pd-extended ppc / i386 / x86_64 mac builds
> being a major issue.
>

Not long ago, we had separate Vanilla binaries for i386 / x86_64 mac builds
in Miller's site. There was a consideration that the 'i386' was there to
run 'old i386 externals'. I think something like that makes sense. I can
see people being thrown off by downloading the app and then not finding
much externals and asking around.


> If you are referring to external support, yes most externals need to be
> recompiled as fat x86_64 / arm, then they are good to go for the
> foreseeable future.
>

yeah, recompiling should be the main concern. I'm currently using mac intel
machines running 10.14.6, so I'm still not ready to compile for apple
silicon, but I'll install a newer system so I can do this now that the
binary is out there. Hopefully someone can compile the current last
versions of Cyclone and ELSE and help me with that by giving them to me so
I can upload them to deken (it seems someone was doing that for Cyclone
just now). Anyway, I'll also take the opportunity to ship new releases of
Cyclone and ELSE before I can update my system to compile modern fat
binaries in a week or so.

cheers



>
> On Mar 30, 2022, at 7:06 AM, pd-list-request at lists.iem.at wrote:
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 02:06:39 -0300
> From: Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com>
> To: Christof Ressi <info at christofressi.com>
> Cc: pd-list at lists.iem.at
> Subject: Re: [PD] [PD-announce] Pd 0.52-2 released
> Message-ID:
> <CAEAsFmghrVft77FiXSKAko=-puxa=Zd=pVL-BNQbujWvZh=kdQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Em ter., 29 de mar. de 2022 ?s 11:12, Christof Ressi <
> info at christofressi.com>
> escreveu:
>
> From my understanding, yes. For that reason, I guess it's not a good idea
> to provide universal binaries at this point and we should rather ship
> seperate binaries. Once most externals are available as universal binaries,
> we might ship Pd as a universal binary as well.
>
> Of course, you can always force apps to run under Rosetta, but I don't
>
> think that's a good user experience.
>
>
> I agree, separate binaries makes more sense these days.
>
>
> --------
> Dan Wilcox
> @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika>
> danomatika.com
> robotcowboy.com
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20220330/8239c600/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Pd-list mailing list