eric b <eric.bachard <at> free.fr> writes: > > Hi Steven, > > Le 3 oct. 07 à 20:23, Steven G. Johnson a écrit : > > > Dear OOo Mac developers, > >
> > > Is it just a matter of futzing a bit with the build procedure, > > header files, commenting out a bit here and there, etc? > > (from memory) if I'm not wrong, dlopen() was still needed in 10.2, > not in 10.3. They are other locales issues and other goodies in sal, > graphical issues in vcl ( we use Quartz ) ... etc .. this is not clear > > > Would you accept patches for backwards compatibility? > > Sure we will !! Be welcome on Mac OS X porting project > > > Or are 10.4-only features deeply woven into the codebase? > > See above ... > > Regards, > Eric Bachard > Hi, I've watched the progress on the native port for a while and think it is very exciting, but was disappointed by the decision not to produce an aqua/cocoa version for 10.3. So I just wanted to express my moral support for the idea of trying to make it backward compatible. The problem is not the result of the porting team approach but more Apples. I am a little shocked that a computer as bought a couple of years ago is increasingly unable to run new software. Apple seems to expect that users will spend money every couple of years on the os, which even microsoft has never seemed to demand of its users. I suspect that a lot of potential openoffice users will, like myself, explore the option of switching to linux instead of paying Apple so as to take advantage of your port, which I think is a real pity. the issue isn't just about having the latest. While the x11 version runs well on my intel 10.4 laptop it is slow and frustrating on my g5 (10.3) imac at home, to the extent that we don't use it. The hope was that an aqua version would solve these problems. cheers, sirrahn --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
