Re: [gentoo-osx] OSX version

[Finn Thain]

On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, Grobian wrote:

>
>
> Finn Thain wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, Grobian wrote:
> >
> > > > I would like to point out that we have the potential for all the
> > > > same kinds of issues as a merged x86/amd46 team would have,
> > > > regarding binary incompatibility and keywording.  Not the the
> > > > extent of that team, but difficulties none the less.
> > > I agree, but this problem should to a certain extend be solved by
> > > using portage provided versions of programs yet supplied by the OS.
> > > I personally think that for now we can get away with primarily
> > > looking at OSX Tiger.
> >
> > I'm curious, is this really a binary compatibility issue, or just a
> > portability problem in libsigsegv?
>
> I hadn't read it like that.  I understood it more like a general point
> being made.  libsigsegv seems to be known with Darwin7, not with 8.
> The model in Darwin8 is different, and supports POSIX sigsegv stuff
> where Darwin7 needs some Darwin7 specific code, apparently like Darwin5
> did.

OK. Thanks.

> To me, this package just works on both Panther and Tiger, but it could
> have been that it wouldn't on one of them.

If "wouldn't work" means "wouldn't build", isn't it a package.mask 
problem, as Hasan said? So, I guess the general point being made is about 
what happens when a package built in darwin 8 doesn't run in 9 (which is 
similar to what happens in a 64-bit system without 32-bit libraries, as 
Nick alluded to).

Generally speaking I wouldn't be suprised to need emerge --emptytree world 
if I wanted to take my gentoo installation to a darwin 9 system. I don't 
think that using more portage provided builds is going to change that. 
Indeed, if portage provides the entire userland, it can't be expected to 
work at all under a new kernel.

Which makes me think that the ppc-macos/10.3 profile should actually 
inherit from a ppc-darwin/8 profile (in my fantasy ;-)

-f
-- 
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list