Re: Redistributable binaries for 10.5 or 10.6 from C++11 sources

[Ken Cunningham]

On 2018-01-14, at 12:33 PM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> 
> I used to build for 10.6/x86_64, 10.6/i386 & ppc on the same 64-bit
> Snow Leopard VM. Doing C++11 cross-compilations for PPC is likely to
> be mission impossible, so I'll need to find a proper PPC, but let's
> see if I can get it working natively to start with.
> 
> Thank you,
>Mojca


Here's the TenFourFox script that copies all the relevant libraries in, and 
updates all the install names to the proper values.

I think you want to do something very much like this.



Ken

Re: Redistributable binaries for 10.5 or 10.6 from C++11 sources

[Ken Cunningham]

On 2018-01-14, at 12:33 PM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:

> On 13 January 2018 at 18:03, Ken Cunningham wrote:
>> I know it can be done. TenFourFox does it. It builds with Macports
>> infrastructure, required parts to support c++11 are moved into the
>> application bundle, and there are scripts that appear to update the install
>> names as you describe. There is a description in the "building tenfourfox"
>> page. 
>> 
>> For 10.5+ only, all the libs could be @rpath based instead I believe.
> 
> Thanks a lot. I'll start playing with 10.6/x86_64 and see whether I
> can convince @rpath to first resolve to the default system libc++ (on
> 10.7 or later, or on computers with libc++ from MacPorts for example)
> and then to some shipped variant.
> 
> I used to build for 10.6/x86_64, 10.6/i386 & ppc on the same 64-bit
> Snow Leopard VM. Doing C++11 cross-compilations for PPC is likely to
> be mission impossible, so I'll need to find a proper PPC, but let's
> see if I can get it working natively to start with.
> 
> Thank you,
>Mojca
> 

Glad you see a path. Happy to help if I can be useful.

Re: Redistributable binaries for 10.5 or 10.6 from C++11 sources

[Mojca Miklavec]

On 13 January 2018 at 18:03, Ken Cunningham wrote:
> I know it can be done. TenFourFox does it. It builds with Macports
> infrastructure, required parts to support c++11 are moved into the
> application bundle, and there are scripts that appear to update the install
> names as you describe. There is a description in the "building tenfourfox"
> page. 
>
> For 10.5+ only, all the libs could be @rpath based instead I believe.

Thanks a lot. I'll start playing with 10.6/x86_64 and see whether I
can convince @rpath to first resolve to the default system libc++ (on
10.7 or later, or on computers with libc++ from MacPorts for example)
and then to some shipped variant.

I used to build for 10.6/x86_64, 10.6/i386 & ppc on the same 64-bit
Snow Leopard VM. Doing C++11 cross-compilations for PPC is likely to
be mission impossible, so I'll need to find a proper PPC, but let's
see if I can get it working natively to start with.

Thank you,
Mojca


> Ken
>
> On Jan 12, 2018, at 11:15 PM, Mojca Miklavec  wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> I would like to build and distribute some poppler-based command-line
> utilities (I would compile them with compiler from MacPorts, but
> distribute it to users with MacPorts).
>
> I could use either gcc or clang, but what are the options to make that
> work for 10.5/10.6?
> Can libc++ or libstdc++ be linked with something like
> @executable_path/../libl/libstdc++.dylib and then distributed
> alongside the binaries? Can lib[std]c++ be built statically (I have an
> impression that's not possible on mac)? What consequences would such
> packages have for, say, users of 10.13 trying to run such binaries?
>
> If this is not feasible, I would target 10.7, but if it's feasible, I
> would optionally try to get it working also for PPC. I'm willing to
> spend a bit of extra effort, but I have no experience with
> transferring the binaries to a computer without lib[std]c++ libraries
> yet. The target audience would be users of any system from the minimum
> supported version up to 10.10. There will be another version for those
> using a supported system compiled on 10.11.
>
> Thank you,
>Mojca

Re: Redistributable binaries for 10.5 or 10.6 from C++11 sources

[Ken Cunningham]

I know it can be done. TenFourFox does it. It builds with Macports 
infrastructure, required parts to support c++11 are moved into the application 
bundle, and there are scripts that appear to update the install names as you 
describe. There is a description in the "building tenfourfox" page. 


For 10.5+ only, all the libs could be @rpath based instead I believe. 

Ken

> On Jan 12, 2018, at 11:15 PM, Mojca Miklavec  wrote:
> 
> Hi.
> 
> I would like to build and distribute some poppler-based command-line
> utilities (I would compile them with compiler from MacPorts, but
> distribute it to users with MacPorts).
> 
> I could use either gcc or clang, but what are the options to make that
> work for 10.5/10.6?
> Can libc++ or libstdc++ be linked with something like
> @executable_path/../libl/libstdc++.dylib and then distributed
> alongside the binaries? Can lib[std]c++ be built statically (I have an
> impression that's not possible on mac)? What consequences would such
> packages have for, say, users of 10.13 trying to run such binaries?
> 
> If this is not feasible, I would target 10.7, but if it's feasible, I
> would optionally try to get it working also for PPC. I'm willing to
> spend a bit of extra effort, but I have no experience with
> transferring the binaries to a computer without lib[std]c++ libraries
> yet. The target audience would be users of any system from the minimum
> supported version up to 10.10. There will be another version for those
> using a supported system compiled on 10.11.
> 
> Thank you,
>Mojca

Redistributable binaries for 10.5 or 10.6 from C++11 sources

[Mojca Miklavec]

Hi.

I would like to build and distribute some poppler-based command-line
utilities (I would compile them with compiler from MacPorts, but
distribute it to users with MacPorts).

I could use either gcc or clang, but what are the options to make that
work for 10.5/10.6?
Can libc++ or libstdc++ be linked with something like
@executable_path/../libl/libstdc++.dylib and then distributed
alongside the binaries? Can lib[std]c++ be built statically (I have an
impression that's not possible on mac)? What consequences would such
packages have for, say, users of 10.13 trying to run such binaries?

If this is not feasible, I would target 10.7, but if it's feasible, I
would optionally try to get it working also for PPC. I'm willing to
spend a bit of extra effort, but I have no experience with
transferring the binaries to a computer without lib[std]c++ libraries
yet. The target audience would be users of any system from the minimum
supported version up to 10.10. There will be another version for those
using a supported system compiled on 10.11.

Thank you,
Mojca