Re: Why doesn't Apple's Installer let me choose architecture?
Re: Why doesn't Apple's Installer let me choose architecture?
- Subject: Re: Why doesn't Apple's Installer let me choose architecture?
- From: Andrew Satori <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:49:21 -0500
I understand the reasons, and they are 100% valid, but the fact
remains, that there are times, when you need to install to different
locations, or install different source that are version / platform
specific. In my case, version. For example, I have an installer for
SQL-Ledger (an open source accounting package) that requires a a
couple of Perl modules. Now on 10.3.x, they go in one place and are
linked against one version of Perl, but that location and linked file
won't work on 10.4.x, it goes somewhere else and is linked against a
different library (set of libraries). In order to get around that,
and keep one installer, I had to use a Bash script to post install
remove the unneeded version of the add-ins. It works, it's just less
than elegant.
Andy
On Dec 15, 2006, at 9:10 AM, Stephane wrote:
There was a flag in the package format which was supposed to allow
you to decide whether a FAT version or native-only version of
executables should be installed. This option is not supported in
10.4 and later.
The reason provided was that this option may lead to problems in
the following cases:
- When you use the Migration Assistant to move from one machine to
another one with a different architecture.
- Drag and drop from one machine to another one (using AFP for
instance).
IMHO, this makes sense.
On Dec 15, 2006, at 4:14 AM, Andrew Satori wrote:
While thinning the apps really doesn't make sense since the
binaries in most cases accounts for a low percentage of the total
package for most applications, there are legitimate times where
this would be nice, in addition to one that that allows
conditional installation on version as well. As it is, I'm using
Bash scripts to deal with these issues, and I'm installing some
useless fluff to deal with multiple version/platform support.
Andy
On Dec 13, 2006, at 11:43 PM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
On Aug 10, 2006, at 18:49 , Robert Nicholson wrote:
If there was a place to decide what architectures you want to
install then Installer.app would be it. So why given the
increasing popularity of laptops with small drives doesn't apple
incorporate the ability to choose installation architectures for
any package in their Installer app?
This has come up before on this and other lists. One prevalent
opinion is that, for a given app, the actual executable code (the
stuff that is architecture-dependent) is typically a small chunk
of the total size, so going to the effort of pruning the code
doesn't seem worth it. It should be pretty simple to check with
a shell script that looks for binaries and checks their size
(with 'size', not 'ls').
Also, my laptop sports a 100-GB drive, which seems to be up to
the task of holding a bunch of fat binaries without getting
squeezed.
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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