September 19
On 2020-09-19 02:38, Iain Buclaw wrote:

> Yeah, I know people who still maintain this hardware (I've even donated a PPC Mac Xserve G5 to them!)

There was someone posting on the Clang mailing list this year or last year about about some issue with PowerPC. Apparently he was a MacPorts maintainer and they have enough users for it to make sense to still support MacPorts on PowerPC.

> Newer versions of OSX just add on top of former, so there's nothing wrong about restricting yourself to a common subset of the available API to bind druntime to.

Well, if I recall correctly, 10.4 is a bit too limiting. The Posix support was really bad. Fortunately, 10.5 was the last version to support running of PowerPC. That version also comes with quite a nice set of features. Certified to be UNIX compliant (but that's only when running Intel), support for 64-bit versions of many of the system libraries. Objective-C 2.0.

10.6 was the last version to support Rosetta (running PowerPC binaries emulated on Intel).

So I would say, 10.5 if you want to run PowerPC natively.

The nice thing with macOS is that you can compile on newer versions of the OS and compile it to be backwards compatible using the `MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET` environment variable. Just specify the version of the OS you want to target as the value:

MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET=10.6 clang main.c

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
September 20
On Saturday, 19 September 2020 at 06:22:44 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2020-09-19 02:38, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I know people who still maintain this hardware (I've even donated a PPC Mac Xserve G5 to them!)
>
> There was someone posting on the Clang mailing list this year or last year about about some issue with PowerPC. Apparently he was a MacPorts maintainer and they have enough users for it to make sense to still support MacPorts on PowerPC.
>
>> Newer versions of OSX just add on top of former, so there's nothing wrong about restricting yourself to a common subset of the available API to bind druntime to.
>
> Well, if I recall correctly, 10.4 is a bit too limiting. The Posix support was really bad. Fortunately, 10.5 was the last version to support running of PowerPC. That version also comes with quite a nice set of features. Certified to be UNIX compliant (but that's only when running Intel), support for 64-bit versions of many of the system libraries. Objective-C 2.0.
>
> 10.6 was the last version to support Rosetta (running PowerPC binaries emulated on Intel).
>
> So I would say, 10.5 if you want to run PowerPC natively.
>

The default minimum supported version in GCC is the last release that supported PPC, i386 and x86_64.  So it could be that you're misremembering 10.4; I think the Mac-mini I have is 10.6, though not too sure about that.  The only certain thing I know is that it's too old to be upgraded to a newer version. :-)
September 21
On Friday, 18 September 2020 at 13:46:38 UTC, wjoe wrote:
> The approach I took for building, testing and creating a tarball for Linux is to build a Docker container which contains enough of an installation of the latest Debian with all the dependencies necessary to build GDC.
>
> In order to move forward the next targets I want to add are Mac OS, FreeBSD, and Windows (but not necessarily in that order) and I want to build Docker containers for those like I did for Linux.
>
> Which versions are relevant ?

I would personally really appreciate a Windows version
September 22
On Sunday, 20 September 2020 at 14:32:58 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:

> The default minimum supported version in GCC is the last release that supported PPC, i386 and x86_64.  So it could be that you're misremembering 10.4;

Yes, that's probably the case.

> I think the Mac-mini I have is  10.6, though not too sure about that.

According to Wikipedia, 10.5 is the last version to natively support PPC. And 10.6 is the last version to support running PPC binaries through emulation (Rosetta).

> The only certain thing I know is that it's too old to be upgraded to a newer version. :-)

Hehe.

--
/Jacob Carlborg
September 22
On Monday, 21 September 2020 at 21:42:06 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
> [...]
> I would personally really appreciate a Windows version

Windows is on the todo list.
September 22
On Tuesday, 22 September 2020 at 10:23:34 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On Sunday, 20 September 2020 at 14:32:58 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
> [ conversation about macOS versions ... ]

All of this is very interesting but at the same time I'm more confused now than I was before :S
September 22
On 2020-09-22 12:47, wjoe wrote:

> All of this is very interesting but at the same time I'm more confused now than I was before :S

It depends if emulation is acceptable or not, I cannot answer that. If it is, go with 10.6. Otherwise go with 10.5.

What you can do is compile the code on any version of macOS any specify the `MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET` environment variable, like this:

MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET=10.6 clang main.c

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
September 23
On Tuesday, 22 September 2020 at 18:36:30 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2020-09-22 12:47, wjoe wrote:
>
>> All of this is very interesting but at the same time I'm more confused now than I was before :S
>
> It depends if emulation is acceptable or not, I cannot answer that. If it is, go with 10.6. Otherwise go with 10.5.
>
> What you can do is compile the code on any version of macOS any specify the `MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET` environment variable, like this:
>
> MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET=10.6 clang main.c

I see.

What they are using at Cirrus [1] is Anka Virtualization [2].
They offer High Sierra out of the box but it's possible to build images yourself.
This Packer template [3] looks somewhat akin to Dockerfile.

Anyways, thanks for your feedback. I'm starting to get a picture.


[1] https://medium.com/cirruslabs/announcing-macos-support-on-cirrus-ci-67f2d6a68553
[2] https://veertu.com/technology/
[3] https://github.com/cirruslabs/osx-images
Next ›   Last »
1 2