On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 4:35 PM Jonas Hahnfeld <hah...@hahnjo.de> wrote: [...]
> By far no Mac expert, but if dynamic libraries are problematic would it > help to have a static executable? Maybe. If I understand correctly, though, .app bundles are *designed* to easily contain dylibs, frameworks, and other dependencies, so (assuming something like dylibbundler can help automate the packaging process) that’s the least of our problems. Nontechnical Mac OS X users are not accustomed to dealing with “naked” executables not contained in .app bundles. The GUI doesn’t even provide a good way of doing so; it’s just not the way the OS works. In other words, for typical users, the executable is going to have to get packaged in an .app bundle regardless of whether it’s statically or dynamically linked. I experimented with such a setup for > Linux, and I eventually got it to build. Not sure what the status of my > script is, I can try to dig it up... That could be useful; I’d like to see it if possible. Thanks! > > Jonas Best, > > -- Marnen Laibow-Koser mar...@marnen.org http://www.marnen.org Sent from Gmail Mobile
