OSX 10.6 libffi updates

OSX 10.6 libffi updates

[Timothy Wall]

Has anyone applied and tested Apple's libffi changes?  python/ctypes has applied them; they're actually required in order to build on ppc-darwin.

The patches from python/ctypes isn't a straight application of changes, there has been some file renaming.

http://svn.python.org/view?view=rev&revision=74972

Re: OSX 10.6 libffi updates

[Anthony Green]

Timothy Wall <twall@users.sf.net> writes:
> Has anyone applied and tested Apple's libffi changes?  python/ctypes has applied them; they're actually required in order to build on ppc-darwin.
>
> The patches from python/ctypes isn't a straight application of changes, there has been some file renaming.
>
> http://svn.python.org/view?view=rev&revision=74972

I had a quick look at these, and I don't think so.

http://moxielogic.org/wiki/index.php?title=Libffi_3.0.9 shows that it
was built and tested on powerpc-apple-darwin9.8.0.

Is the darwin equivalent of OSX 10.6 "darwin10.6"?  I've never really
followed Apple releases.

It would be nice to get these changes in if we could figure out what OS
we're really targeting.

Thanks,

AG

RE: OSX 10.6 libffi updates

[Jay K]

I agree the versions are confusing.
My 10.5 systems calls itself:

Darwin jbook2 9.8.0 Darwin Kernel Version 9.8.0: Wed Jul 15 16:55:01 PDT 2009; root:xnu-1228.15.4~1/RELEASE_I386 i386

if that helps.

> Is the darwin equivalent of OSX 10.6 "darwin10.6"?

No, it isn't.
I don't know the formula, just that it isn't what anyone would expect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_%28operating_system%29
says 10.5 == 9.0, 10.6==10.0, among others.

 - Jay

----------------------------------------
> From: green@redhat.com
> To: twall@users.sf.net
> CC: libffi-discuss@sourceware.org
> Subject: Re: OSX 10.6 libffi updates
> Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 13:42:49 -0400
>
> Timothy Wall  writes:
>> Has anyone applied and tested Apple's libffi changes? python/ctypes has applied them; they're actually required in order to build on ppc-darwin.
>>
>> The patches from python/ctypes isn't a straight application of changes, there has been some file renaming.
>>
>> http://svn.python.org/view?view=rev&revision=74972
>
> I had a quick look at these, and I don't think so.
>
> http://moxielogic.org/wiki/index.php?title=Libffi_3.0.9 shows that it
> was built and tested on powerpc-apple-darwin9.8.0.
>
> Is the darwin equivalent of OSX 10.6 "darwin10.6"? I've never really
> followed Apple releases.
>
> It would be nice to get these changes in if we could figure out what OS
> we're really targeting.
>
> Thanks,
>
> AG
 		 	   		  

Re: OSX 10.6 libffi updates

[Anthony Green]

Jay K <jay.krell@cornell.edu> writes:

> I don't know the formula, just that it isn't what anyone would expect.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_%28operating_system%29
> says 10.5 == 9.0, 10.6==10.0, among others.


Thanks Jay.   So x86 darwin10.0 is known to build thanks for aghuloum (although I see no
test results).   I guess nobody tried the ppc version.   

Is it still a platform people care about?  I thought Apple was all Intel these days.

AG

RE: OSX 10.6 libffi updates

[Jay K]

Apple may not care, but I'm sure there are still users.
10.6 may not exist for PowerPC, but 10.5, 10.4, etc. do.
(Notice that it may not reach the levels of e.g. Linux (alpha, mips, sparc, hppa, ia64...),
Darwin does run on a somewhat impressive "5" architectures: ppc, ppc64, x86, amd64, arm.)

 - Jay

----------------------------------------
> From: green@redhat.com
> To: jay.krell@cornell.edu
> CC: twall@users.sf.net; libffi-discuss@sourceware.org
> CC: aghuloum@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: OSX 10.6 libffi updates
> Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 14:40:54 -0400
>
> Jay K  writes:
>
>> I don't know the formula, just that it isn't what anyone would expect.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_%28operating_system%29
>> says 10.5 == 9.0, 10.6==10.0, among others.
>
>
> Thanks Jay. So x86 darwin10.0 is known to build thanks for aghuloum (although I see no
> test results). I guess nobody tried the ppc version.
>
> Is it still a platform people care about? I thought Apple was all Intel these days.
>
> AG