I wanted to split the macOS installer and have prepared 2 new jobs. I have disabled ooRexx-macOS12-build and created ooRexx-macOS12-X86_64-build and ooRexx-macOS12-ARM64-build.
I have then replaced in those jobs -DBUILD_OSX_UNIVERSAL_BINARIES=1 With (respectively) -DBUILD_X86_64_BINARIES=1 -DBUILD_ARM64_BINARIES=1 But this is not sufficient, CMakeLists.txt will need to be changed. My proposal is: Lines 61-63: if( APPLE AND BUILD_OSX_UNIVERSAL_BINARIES ) set( CMAKE_OSX_ARCHITECTURES arm64 x86_64 ) endif() be changed to if( APPLE AND BUILD_OSX_UNIVERSAL_BINARIES ) set( CMAKE_OSX_ARCHITECTURES arm64 x86_64 ) endif() if( APPLE AND BUILD_X86_64_BINARIES ) set( CMAKE_OSX_ARCHITECTURES x86_64 ) endif() if( APPLE AND BUILD_ARM64_BINARIES ) set( CMAKE_OSX_ARCHITECTURES arm64 ) endif() I assume we should keep the possibility to build fat binaries, hence 3 different checks. Any objections or improvements? Also I think the lines 53-57 in CMakeLists.txt need to be changed: # must come before the project command # 10.13.6 High Sierra is the minimum system supported if( APPLE AND BUILD_OSX_UNIVERSAL_BINARIES ) set( CMAKE_OSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET 10.13.6 CACHE STRING "" FORCE) endif() Would this work? # must come before the project command # 10.13.6 High Sierra is the minimum system supported if( APPLE ) set( CMAKE_OSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET 10.13.6 CACHE STRING "" FORCE) endif() The ooRexx test for macOS would then be attached to the X86_64 build job since we run the VMs on Intel hardware. Finally we have to look if there is also a need to change the „Universal“ installer. I think Rony must look at this. Hälsningar/Regards/Grüsse, P.O. Jonsson oor...@jonases.se > Am 13.01.2024 um 20:52 schrieb Gilbert Barmwater <gi...@bellsouth.net>: > > Feel free to ignore this as I am NOT a MacOS user. I feel that having 2 > packages is the more straightforward way to proceed rather than continuing > with the complexity of a universal package even though that may be "common" > on the MacOS platform. My 2 cents, FWIW. > > Gil > > On 1/13/2024 2:12 PM, oorexx wrote: >> The bitness (64 bit) and the endianness (little-endian) is the same, the >> architecture is the only difference. But I have no objection to split the >> macOS installer, all that is needed is to create two new jobs on Jenkins >> with the different settings. >> >> Any objections? >> >> Hälsningar/Regards/Grüsse, >> P.O. Jonsson >> oor...@jonases.se <mailto:oor...@jonases.se> >> >> >> >> >>> Am 13.01.2024 um 19:56 schrieb Rony G. Flatscher <rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at >>> <mailto:rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at>>: >>> >>> As rexx.img must be of the same architecture, bitness and endianness it is >>> not possible to use a single rexx.img for different architectures, >>> bitnesses and endiannesses. >>> >>> The present packaging and installation of ooRexx can therefore not take >>> advantage of universal packages available on macOS (because of rexx.img) >>> such that we should start to stop producing the universal macOS version and >>> instead have two different macOS packages created, one for amd64 and one >>> for arm64. >>> >>> --- >>> >>> As rexx.img gets installed into and loaded from the lib directory as if it >>> was a native library, would it make sense to think of a >>> universal packaging format for rexx.img which would allow to create a form >>> of universal rexx.img? E.g. a table that indicates the available >>> architectures and positions in a rexx.img file such that ooRexx can pick >>> the appropriate version? >>> >>> If so, then it would be probably be helpful to allow for universal user >>> compiled Rexx programs as well, as the same infrastructure could then be >>> put in place, if not mistaken. >>> >>> What do you think would such an endeavor be worthwhile at all? >>> >>> ---rony >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Oorexx-devel mailing list >>> Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> <mailto:Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel >>> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Oorexx-devel mailing list >> Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> <mailto:Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel >> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel> > -- > Gil Barmwater > _______________________________________________ > Oorexx-devel mailing list > Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
_______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
