On Jul 17, 2006, at 8:29 PM, Damien Sorresso wrote:
On 17 Jul, 2006, at 10:16 PM, Eric Albert wrote:
On Jul 17, 2006, at 8:08 PM, Damien Sorresso wrote:
No, they're two separate binaries. (Trust me there's a good
reason for this.)
I hate to say this, but I don't quite trust you on that. :)
What's the reason? I've seen an awful lot of cases over the past
year where folks thought they needed separate binaries but I've
yet to see one which actually did. Maybe you'll be the first....
Because the application I'm writing has to run on all versions of
Panther, down to 10.3.0. (Part of its function is to make sure the
user is up-to-date on point releases.) To compile a universal
binary, you need to use gcc 4.0, and in order to run applications
compiled with gcc 4.0, you must be running 10.3.9.
How's that work for you? :)
Not too well. :) You only need to use gcc 4.0 for the Intel side,
but the PowerPC side of your binary can use any Mach-O compiler at
all, including gcc 2.95.3 or even CodeWarrior. If you're building
both sides with Xcode, you can do this entirely within the Xcode UI:
<http://developer.apple.com/documentation/DeveloperTools/Conceptual/
XcodeUserGuide/Contents/Resources/en.lproj/05_07_bs_building_product/
chapter_34_section_6.html>
It might be interesting to build the PowerPC side of your binary with
gcc 4.0 as a test case to make sure your dlsym call continued to work
there. Even so, I'd still suggest running nm on both slices (whether
two binaries or just one) to make sure the expected symbol shows up
for both architectures.
-Eric
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/email@hidden
