[OS X TeX] Threads on MacIntel

[Bruno Voisin]

Le 10 juin 05 à 17:06, Jonathan Kew a écrit :

> However, this isn't really necessary (depending on the overall  
> setup). Consider the output of
>
>     $ which tex
>
> which, on my machine, responds
>
>     /usr/local/teTeX/bin/powerpc-apple-darwin-current/tex
>
> Note the path. If I were on an Intel Mac, the "powerpc" part would  
> be replaced by "i686" or something. So the binaries would be  
> separate anyway. The two architectures can co-exist in a single  
> filesystem even without universal binaries, by appropriate PATH  
> configuration, etc.

As far as I understood, the powerpc here in the path (and more  
generally the imbrication of directories) was Gerben's decision, not  
something imposed by TeX or OS X in itself. Or did I misunderstand?

So what you're saying is that i-Installer (or whichever installer is  
used for gwTeX at the time MacTel Macs are released) should detect,  
at install time, the processor and determine the binaries to be  
installed (ie chooses then between two directories bin/i686-apple- 
darwin-current/ and bin/powerpc-apple-darwin-current/, both included  
inside the i-Package). Would'nt it be simpler to have universal  
binaries?

It reminds me of the 68k -> PowerPC transition (how old I feel by  
writing this!), when installers generally gave the choice between 68k  
binaries, or PowerPC binaries, or fat binaries running on both  
processors.

>> For OS X front-ends, making sure that they use Cocoa fully would  
>> go a long way to ensure portability.
>
> Those who have been at WWDC this week are, of course, constrained  
> by the usual NDA rules from saying much, but I think I can take the  
> liberty of commenting that I see no reason to be concerned. :)

Do you mean here that the info given to developers at the WWDC is  
covered by the NDA? I thought all that info was public, given the  
WWDC is a public conference, a bit like a showcase; and that the NDA  
applied only to prerelease software (like Tiger, the software  
updates, etc.), got by the developers from the ADC, until the  
software was released officially.

Similarly I was puzzled, when downloading and installing Xcode 2.1  
this week (not that I use it for coding actually!), to see a mention  
of NDA on the web download page (after entering my ADC login and  
password). I thought there was nothing secret in Xcode 2.1, that it  
was public.

So I imagine all the developers who buy a Transition Kit from Apple  
will also have to sign a NDA?

Bruno Voisin--------------------- Info ---------------------
Mac-TeX Website: http://www.esm.psu.edu/mac-tex/
           & FAQ: http://latex.yauh.de/faq/
TeX FAQ: http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq
List Post: <mailto:MacOSX-TeX at email.esm.psu.edu>