Re: G4 and G5 executable
Re: G4 and G5 executable
- Subject: Re: G4 and G5 executable
- From: Dave Rehring <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 14:29:08 -0700
On 4/4/05 12:34 PM, George Warner at email@hidden wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 09:52:36 -0700, Dave Rehring <email@hidden> wrote:
>> Gah. The mach-o format supported fat binaries 15 years ago, when you could
>> have native binaries for 68K and Intel boxes in the same binaries.
>
> This is true for the arch but not for the sub-arch (different variants of
> the same processor architecture). We didn't add the arch sub-type smarts to
> the fat dylb loader until Panther.
Really? I seem to recall being able to make '030 and '040 specific
binaries, but I could be wrong about that.
And given your statement, it doesn't sound like something "new for Tiger"...
;-)
Later,
--
David Rehring Psychos do not explode when light hits
VP of Research and Development them, no matter how crazy they are...
Atimi Software, Inc.
www.atimi.com And totally insane guy!
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden