Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
Hi, On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 06:59:01PM +, Christopher Jones wrote: > If it where my choice, I would drop OSX releases < say 10.10… It > isn’t, and thats fine, but thats just my opinion. In case you were not aware, that's more or less our policy. We officially support current - 3, that's 10.10 at the moment. Everything older is on a best-effort basis at the maintainer's peril. For my ports, I accept patches for systems older than that, but will not spend time to fix them myself. We try not to actively break base on older releases, but newer features are only enabled on newer OS X (trace mode, for example, does not work on old OSes -- or at least not correctly). -- Clemens
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On 22.03.2018 at 19:59 Christopher Jones wrote: > Lets leave this here, as we aren’t going to agree on this it seems. It has never been my aim to make you agree with me. I was just trying to make it a little more plausible why some people might still want to stick with outdated software ;-) -- Best regards, Andreas Falkenhahnmailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
Hi > On 22 Mar 2018, at 5:21 pm, Andreas Falkenhahn wrote: > > On 20.03.2018 at 23:59 Chris Jones wrote: > >> You can call these OSes ‘retro’ if you want, to make it sound good, >> but all they really are, are outdated and insecure. > > By the way, another reason to use "outdated and insecure" operating > systems from a programmer's point of view is backwards compatibility. > Of course, the latest Xcode versions allow you to target older Mac OS > versions with just a mouse click but this stuff is often hardly tested > and I've seen the strangest things happen when building for 10.6 on > 10.13 let's say. No one should still be targeting such an outdated OS as 10.6, so this argument is moot, in my opinion. Look, if you want to run insecure OSes like this, that is your choice, and I would not want to try and suggest you should not have the free will to do so. I just hope our digital paths never cross… I also still maintain MacPorts should not be going out of its way to promote the idea its OK to use such OSes. If it where my choice, I would drop OSX releases < say 10.10… It isn’t, and thats fine, but thats just my opinion. Lets leave this here, as we aren’t going to agree on this it seems. Chris > > Upwards compatibility, however, is a completely different case > because there are lots of binaries compiled on 10.6 or even older > versions around and Apple usually tries hard to keep binary > compatibility. They even support real ancient stuff like QuickDraw > in binaries which have long been removed from the SDKs. > > So it's a much better idea to keep older versions of the operating > system and build on these than trying to build for older versions on > newer versions. > > It's also worth mentioning that APIs declared obsolete are often > quickly removed from the SDK. So the only chance to be able to > use APIs declared obsolete often is to keep your old installation. > > -- > Best regards, > Andreas Falkenhahnmailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On 20.03.2018 at 23:59 Chris Jones wrote: > You can call these OSes ‘retro’ if you want, to make it sound good, > but all they really are, are outdated and insecure. By the way, another reason to use "outdated and insecure" operating systems from a programmer's point of view is backwards compatibility. Of course, the latest Xcode versions allow you to target older Mac OS versions with just a mouse click but this stuff is often hardly tested and I've seen the strangest things happen when building for 10.6 on 10.13 let's say. Upwards compatibility, however, is a completely different case because there are lots of binaries compiled on 10.6 or even older versions around and Apple usually tries hard to keep binary compatibility. They even support real ancient stuff like QuickDraw in binaries which have long been removed from the SDKs. So it's a much better idea to keep older versions of the operating system and build on these than trying to build for older versions on newer versions. It's also worth mentioning that APIs declared obsolete are often quickly removed from the SDK. So the only chance to be able to use APIs declared obsolete often is to keep your old installation. -- Best regards, Andreas Falkenhahnmailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On 2018-03-20, at 2:27 PM, Andreas Falkenhahn wrote: >> >> Personally, I do not understand why you are still running such an old >> machine with macOS. > > It's retro, there doesn't have to be a rational reason for it :-) > Besides, in the retro scene 10.4 is quite popular because it's the > last Mac OS capable of running Mac OS 9 software. I also thought that 10.4 was the last version capable of running EOF software. --- Entertaining minecraft videos http://YouTube.com/keybounce
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On 21 Mar 2018, at 14:23, miniupnp wrote: On the other hand, it is also fun to read message about someone afraid of his hardware burned by a hours long macports build :) This is a serious concern. I've had 3 Macs (Cube, G5 iMac, MacBook) that got worse at heat dissipation over time to the point that they could no longer do anything CPU-heavy for more than about 15 minutes straight without the thermal protection halting the system or in the case of the Cube, sometimes NOT halting it before a seemingly hardware-generated panic. It's not unreasonable to suspect that as thermal paste ages and heat sinks get a layer of insulating dust, the baseline thermal wear is a bit higher and high-load events become increasingly risky.
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On 20.03.2018 at 23:51 Ryan Schmidt wrote: > There is not a great deal of interest in Tiger anymore, but I > understand that the computers that are still running Tiger are slow > and are thus the ones that might most benefit from the existence of binaries. Definitely. Having binaries would be a great benefit for those old systems. -- Best regards, Andreas Falkenhahnmailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
Le 21.03.2018 à 19:29, Daniel J. Luke a écrit : > On Mar 21, 2018, at 2:23 PM, miniupnp wrote: >> It's quite fun to read exhortations to use upgrade to a more recent >> system. I'm trying to imagine which hacker could spend time to exploit >> Mac PPC machines to include them in a bitcoin mining botnet ;) > or DDOS or SPAM or other abusive behavior that makes it harder for others to > utilize a shared resource. > > but hey - at least you're having fun... > > [It's possible to safely use old systems, but it's not trivial. The easiest > way to keep that old hardware useful is to run an OS that is still being > supported - it's unfortunate that Apple doesn't keep releasing security > patches for older systems, but there's nothing that we can do about that]. You seems afraid of our 10.4 machines currently being exploited to abuse the internet. Let me reassure your : mine is currently turned off. Of course I would not use such machine for production use... I'm pretty sure that a turned off G4 Mac is less likely to send SPAM than a state of the art intel machine which even "turned off" is still running the ME. You also minimize the economics aspects of security. As someone pointed out, there are very few PowerPC 10.4 around. Even if easier to exploit than newer system, who would invest in Mac OS 10.4 support for a SPAM spending botnet ??? I would really want to see some statistics about the amount of DDOS attacks or SPAM sent depending on OS/architectures.
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On Mar 21, 2018, at 2:23 PM, miniupnp wrote: > It's quite fun to read exhortations to use upgrade to a more recent > system. I'm trying to imagine which hacker could spend time to exploit > Mac PPC machines to include them in a bitcoin mining botnet ;) or DDOS or SPAM or other abusive behavior that makes it harder for others to utilize a shared resource. but hey - at least you're having fun... [It's possible to safely use old systems, but it's not trivial. The easiest way to keep that old hardware useful is to run an OS that is still being supported - it's unfortunate that Apple doesn't keep releasing security patches for older systems, but there's nothing that we can do about that]. -- Daniel J. Luke
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
I'm one of the guys who run a 10.4 G4 "just because I can". Some call it retro computing :) I'm glad macports still supports it and try to help to fix things when a port is not building on it. but I'm not expecting the project to spend resources in building binaries for this kind of system. When I need something, I just launch the "port install" command before going to bed and let the build take the time it takes. It's quite fun to read exhortations to use upgrade to a more recent system. I'm trying to imagine which hacker could spend time to exploit Mac PPC machines to include them in a bitcoin mining botnet ;) On the other hand, it is also fun to read message about someone afraid of his hardware burned by a hours long macports build :) Regards Le 20.03.2018 à 23:55, Chris Jones a écrit : >> On 20 Mar 2018, at 8:43 pm, Andreas Falkenhahn >> wrote: >> >>> On 20.03.2018 at 21:35 Ken Cunningham wrote: >>> >>> On 10.5 you installed a prebuilt binary. >>> gcc6 takes 12 to 24 hrs to build on a PPC machine. >> Oh my, that's too much for me, I've just hit CTRL-C. Of course this might >> leave me with a corrupt installation but I'm just too paranoid about Mac >> Ports killing my hardware. >> >> IMHO there really should be prebuilt binaries for 10.4. It's a waste of >> energy and resources to have everybody build this on his own... > The user base still using 10.4 is tiny tending to zero. It simply is not > worth the effort.
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On 21.03.2018 at 00:34 David Strubbe wrote: > For the record, you can always stop a build by typing CTRL-C, and > it will not corrupt anything. Only at the install stage are any > files permanently changed. If you do "port clean" after stopping the > build, you will be right back where you were before the build. Thanks, that's good to know! -- Best regards, Andreas Falkenhahnmailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On 20.03.2018 at 23:59 Chris Jones wrote: > You can call these OSes ‘retro’ if you want, to make it sound good, > but all they really are, are outdated and insecure. I've always preferred freedom over security. And by the way, I have a feeling that with each new Mac OS version the system becomes more and more curious about me, tries to collect data, hides things from me, and tries to infantilize me by pretending to know what is good and bad for me (Gatekeeper anyone?) In that regard, the older Mac OS versions are really much more pleasant than the latest releases which seem to take away more and more control from the user. That might be very good for people without a clue about computing but for coders it's a pain in the "donkey". It's time to regain control - the OS is here to serve, not to spy on me or impose its will on me :-) $0.02 -- Best regards, Andreas Falkenhahnmailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
For the record, you can always stop a build by typing CTRL-C, and it will not corrupt anything. Only at the install stage are any files permanently changed. If you do "port clean" after stopping the build, you will be right back where you were before the build. David On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 4:13 PM, Riccardo Mottola via macports-users < macports-users@lists.macports.org> wrote: > Hi, > > Chris Jones wrote: > >> IMHO we shouldn't do anything to support Mac OS versions that aren't >>> getting security patches from Apple anymore (since it's a dis-service to >>> the rest of the people who use the internet when we make it easier for >>> people to keep unpatched machines connected to that shared resource). >>> >> Glad someone else has the same view on this as me. Completely agree. >> >> > > Personally, I disagree... it may be because I usem and because any of the > mac I have can get updates, even if the hardware is fine and perfectly fine > software can run on it. Almost any dual-core intel mac is quite fine for > everyday usage, and running the last available (sadly becoming obsolete) > Firefox versions shows hoe nice those computers are. > > Regarding PPC of course things are a bit worse, but there is "high value" > in those machines because of their architecture (in my opinion "superior" > or in an case "unique") and which is still a nice way to test e.g. > Big-Endianness in a conveninet way or in any case portability. > For others it has some "value", being the last in-house developed boards > of Apple instead of commodity stuff slapped in a cool Apple case. > > I get a tear that I can run more op-to-date software on an old WIndows XP > PC than on a much more modern Mac, with 10.5 or even 10.7. > Just because Apple leaves people in the dust much earlier, free software > shouldn't, even if it does. > > Sorry for the rant... I just love those old Macs too much. I need for them > only one thin.. current TLS and a browser and they would be ready for every > day! > > Riccardo >
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
Hi, Chris Jones wrote: IMHO we shouldn't do anything to support Mac OS versions that aren't getting security patches from Apple anymore (since it's a dis-service to the rest of the people who use the internet when we make it easier for people to keep unpatched machines connected to that shared resource). Glad someone else has the same view on this as me. Completely agree. Personally, I disagree... it may be because I usem and because any of the mac I have can get updates, even if the hardware is fine and perfectly fine software can run on it. Almost any dual-core intel mac is quite fine for everyday usage, and running the last available (sadly becoming obsolete) Firefox versions shows hoe nice those computers are. Regarding PPC of course things are a bit worse, but there is "high value" in those machines because of their architecture (in my opinion "superior" or in an case "unique") and which is still a nice way to test e.g. Big-Endianness in a conveninet way or in any case portability. For others it has some "value", being the last in-house developed boards of Apple instead of commodity stuff slapped in a cool Apple case. I get a tear that I can run more op-to-date software on an old WIndows XP PC than on a much more modern Mac, with 10.5 or even 10.7. Just because Apple leaves people in the dust much earlier, free software shouldn't, even if it does. Sorry for the rant... I just love those old Macs too much. I need for them only one thin.. current TLS and a browser and they would be ready for every day! Riccardo
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
> On 20 Mar 2018, at 9:27 pm, Andreas Falkenhahn wrote: > >> On 20.03.2018 at 21:58 Rainer Müller wrote: >> >> Personally, I do not understand why you are still running such an old >> machine with macOS. > > It's retro, there doesn't have to be a rational reason for it :-) > Besides, in the retro scene 10.4 is quite popular because it's the > last Mac OS capable of running Mac OS 9 software. > > I also have a 10.6 installation which I won't update because 10.6 > has Rosetta (PPC emulation). It's vintage - it needn't make sense. You can call these OSes ‘retro’ if you want, to make it sound good, but all they really are, are outdated and insecure. > > -- > Best regards, > Andreas Falkenhahnmailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com >
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
> On 20 Mar 2018, at 8:48 pm, Daniel J. Luke wrote: > >> On Mar 20, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Andreas Falkenhahn >> wrote: >> IMHO there really should be prebuilt binaries for 10.4. It's a waste of >> energy and resources to have everybody build this on his own... > > IMHO we shouldn't do anything to support Mac OS versions that aren't getting > security patches from Apple anymore (since it's a dis-service to the rest of > the people who use the internet when we make it easier for people to keep > unpatched machines connected to that shared resource). Glad someone else has the same view on this as me. Completely agree. > > if you really want it, it's possible for anyone to run a 10.4 build machine > and share archives: https://trac.macports.org/wiki/howto/ShareArchives2 > -- > Daniel J. Luke > > >
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
> On 20 Mar 2018, at 8:43 pm, Andreas Falkenhahn wrote: > >> On 20.03.2018 at 21:35 Ken Cunningham wrote: >> >> On 10.5 you installed a prebuilt binary. >> gcc6 takes 12 to 24 hrs to build on a PPC machine. > > Oh my, that's too much for me, I've just hit CTRL-C. Of course this might > leave me with a corrupt installation but I'm just too paranoid about Mac > Ports killing my hardware. > > IMHO there really should be prebuilt binaries for 10.4. It's a waste of > energy and resources to have everybody build this on his own... The user base still using 10.4 is tiny tending to zero. It simply is not worth the effort. > > -- > Best regards, > Andreas Falkenhahnmailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com >
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On Mar 20, 2018, at 15:32, Andreas Falkenhahn wrote: > Where does this difference come from? On my 10.5 G5 PowerMac it really was > just a few minutes and now it's taking hours. Yes, the G5 is faster but > certainly not that much. To me it looked as if on 10.5 binaries were > downloaded and installed whereas on 10.4 everything is built from scratch. > Is that right? Yes. We have never offered binaries for Mac OS X Tiger v10.4 or earlier. The ability for MacPorts to use binaries was added in version 2.0.0, released in 2011, at which point Tiger and Leopard had already been superseded by Snow Leopard for two years. We initially offered binaries for Snow Leopard x86_64, and added binaries for subsequent versions of macOS as they were released. When we left macOS forge at the end of 2016 and set up our own infrastructure and redesigned our build system, we also began building binaries for Snow Leopard i386 and Leopard ppc. We could purchase a second Power Mac G5 and start building binaries for Tiger ppc. There is not a great deal of interest in Tiger anymore, but I understand that the computers that are still running Tiger are slow and are thus the ones that might most benefit from the existence of binaries.
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
+1. Uli > On Mar 20, 2018, at 4:27 PM, Andreas Falkenhahn > wrote: > > On 20.03.2018 at 21:58 Rainer Müller wrote: > >> Personally, I do not understand why you are still running such an old >> machine with macOS. > > It's retro, there doesn't have to be a rational reason for it :-) > Besides, in the retro scene 10.4 is quite popular because it's the > last Mac OS capable of running Mac OS 9 software. > > I also have a 10.6 installation which I won't update because 10.6 > has Rosetta (PPC emulation). It's vintage - it needn't make sense. > > -- > Best regards, > Andreas Falkenhahnmailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com >
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On 20.03.2018 at 21:58 Rainer Müller wrote: > Personally, I do not understand why you are still running such an old > machine with macOS. It's retro, there doesn't have to be a rational reason for it :-) Besides, in the retro scene 10.4 is quite popular because it's the last Mac OS capable of running Mac OS 9 software. I also have a 10.6 installation which I won't update because 10.6 has Rosetta (PPC emulation). It's vintage - it needn't make sense. -- Best regards, Andreas Falkenhahnmailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On 2018-03-20 21:43, Andreas Falkenhahn wrote: > On 20.03.2018 at 21:35 Ken Cunningham wrote: > >> On 10.5 you installed a prebuilt binary. >> gcc6 takes 12 to 24 hrs to build on a PPC machine. > > Oh my, that's too much for me, I've just hit CTRL-C. Of course this might > leave me with a corrupt installation but I'm just too paranoid about Mac > Ports killing my hardware. > > IMHO there really should be prebuilt binaries for 10.4. It's a waste of > energy and resources to have everybody build this on his own... I try to understand your frustration, but how many users of 10.4 on PPC are out there? It probably takes more energy to build all the ports nobody is ever going to install. As you noticed it takes a lot of time to compile for 10.4 PPC. I see no benefit of building for that, as the resources are better spent on building binary archives for recent releases. Personally, I do not understand why you are still running such an old machine with macOS. This system is unsupported by Apple for about 10 years by now. In my opinion if you want to keep using the hardware, install Linux or FreeBSD, but macOS for that platform is dead for a long time already. Rainer
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On Mar 20, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Andreas Falkenhahn wrote: > IMHO there really should be prebuilt binaries for 10.4. It's a waste of > energy and resources to have everybody build this on his own... IMHO we shouldn't do anything to support Mac OS versions that aren't getting security patches from Apple anymore (since it's a dis-service to the rest of the people who use the internet when we make it easier for people to keep unpatched machines connected to that shared resource). if you really want it, it's possible for anyone to run a 10.4 build machine and share archives: https://trac.macports.org/wiki/howto/ShareArchives2 -- Daniel J. Luke
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On 20.03.2018 at 21:35 Ken Cunningham wrote: > On 10.5 you installed a prebuilt binary. > gcc6 takes 12 to 24 hrs to build on a PPC machine. Oh my, that's too much for me, I've just hit CTRL-C. Of course this might leave me with a corrupt installation but I'm just too paranoid about Mac Ports killing my hardware. IMHO there really should be prebuilt binaries for 10.4. It's a waste of energy and resources to have everybody build this on his own... -- Best regards, Andreas Falkenhahnmailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com
Re: Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
On 10.5 you installed a prebuilt binary. gcc6 takes 12 to 24 hrs to build on a PPC machine. I should make my premade binaries available. K > On Mar 20, 2018, at 14:32, Andreas Falkenhahn wrote: > > > > So I installed gcc6 on my 10.5 G5 PowerMac a few days ago and it was a breeze. > It took just a few minutes. It looked like the installer just grabbed the > binaries > and installed them. No big deal at all. > > Now I am trying to install gcc6 on my 10.4 G4 Mac Mini and it seems to build > everything from sources and it's taking ages. Building apple-gcc42 took two > hours alone and that was just the first of many packages to come. > > I'm worried about my hardware because the CPU is at 100% all the time causing > the Mac Mini fan to be in full ventilation all the time. It has been running > like that for 3 hours now and there are still many more packages to go. If > it's > going to continue at that speed, I'd estimate the gcc6 installation to take > about 12 hours or so. > > Where does this difference come from? On my 10.5 G5 PowerMac it really was > just a few minutes and now it's taking hours. Yes, the G5 is faster but > certainly not that much. To me it looked as if on 10.5 binaries were > downloaded and installed whereas on 10.4 everything is built from scratch. > Is that right? > > If it is, there really should be a warning that this is going to take ages > because once the thing has been started there's no way out since I don't > want to interrupt it in the middle of installing for fear of breaking > something. And I'm worried about my hardware. It's 13 years old and now > has to run under full stress for hours and hours and hours :-/ Why doesn't > Mac Ports simply provide ready to run binaries for 10.4 PPC? The current > installation process feels a little bit like maximum overdose for my > poor old PPC Mac Mini... > > > > -- > Best regards, > Andreas Falkenhahn mailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com >
Installing gcc6 on a PPC Mac Mini 10.4 gives me hell
So I installed gcc6 on my 10.5 G5 PowerMac a few days ago and it was a breeze. It took just a few minutes. It looked like the installer just grabbed the binaries and installed them. No big deal at all. Now I am trying to install gcc6 on my 10.4 G4 Mac Mini and it seems to build everything from sources and it's taking ages. Building apple-gcc42 took two hours alone and that was just the first of many packages to come. I'm worried about my hardware because the CPU is at 100% all the time causing the Mac Mini fan to be in full ventilation all the time. It has been running like that for 3 hours now and there are still many more packages to go. If it's going to continue at that speed, I'd estimate the gcc6 installation to take about 12 hours or so. Where does this difference come from? On my 10.5 G5 PowerMac it really was just a few minutes and now it's taking hours. Yes, the G5 is faster but certainly not that much. To me it looked as if on 10.5 binaries were downloaded and installed whereas on 10.4 everything is built from scratch. Is that right? If it is, there really should be a warning that this is going to take ages because once the thing has been started there's no way out since I don't want to interrupt it in the middle of installing for fear of breaking something. And I'm worried about my hardware. It's 13 years old and now has to run under full stress for hours and hours and hours :-/ Why doesn't Mac Ports simply provide ready to run binaries for 10.4 PPC? The current installation process feels a little bit like maximum overdose for my poor old PPC Mac Mini... -- Best regards, Andreas Falkenhahn mailto:andr...@falkenhahn.com
