> I recently downloaded a prebuilt version of both basiliskii and sheepshaver > from the 'macemulation' website that is 64bit and runs on BigSur, and that > works well too.
I think you meant https://www.emaculation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7361 https://www.emaculation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7360 It's been several years since I last indulged my emulation interests, and this site keeps coming up, but even though I recently studied instructions here for qumu-system-68k, I only now realize the site is (currently) central to these sorts of efforts. > There are upstream versions available that run as far back as 10.6.8 I > believe. Using pre-built binaries is probably a far more practical solution here, allows me to keep running Mojave rather than starting over with High Sierra. Since responding this morning, I already imaged the internal Mojave install to an external partition and installed High Sierra on another external partition, and I was about to image High Sierra back to the internal storage when I read your reply. I just booted back off internal Mojave. I may keep building out High Sierra booting off the external partition, but now that I don't necessarily need to, then maybe I'll mess with it next weekend, or whenever. Thanks Ken. > On Nov 21, 2021, at 12:03, Ken Cunningham <[email protected]> > wrote: > > When I last updated the basiliskii and sheepshaver ports I was still fairly > new to macports and took them on as a challenge. They had some interesting > wrinkles I was looking to understand. > > > At that time, both of them did not run well when built as 64-bit versions; > the JIT code, that really makes them run quickly, did not work when built 64 > bit, and the networking stack had not been fixed to build and run 64 bit. Of > course, at that time, macOS supported i386, and we were (most of us) unaware > that 32bit Intel support was about to disappear. > > > So the ports were set up to force both of them to build as 32bit versions, > which worked. I allowed a +SixtyFour variant for people who were explorers to > try out the 64bit build. > > > Because the GUI required the whole x11 infrastructure to run, and it was > pointed out that most people would not want to have to build that all > universal, I came up with a way to build the GUI separately. That way, it > could be 64bit only, and save the x11 stack from endless universal building. > > > Things have changed; both basiliskii and sheepshaver have had their 64 bit > warts removed, and they do now work properly when built 64 (current > versions). There are several forks, and one of the forks now is better than > the upstream I used in 2017 I believe. > > > Both basiliskii and sheepshaver continue to work very well. I still use > MacPort's 32 bit version all the time on my older 10.6 system, to run some > older MacOS9 software I like to use. It works just great, and I don't think > it ever needs to be updated, to be honest, although I have not rebuilt it in > a while to see if anything has changed in the build supporting ports. > > > I recently downloaded a prebuilt version of both basiliskii and sheepshaver > from the 'macemulation' website that is 64bit and runs on BigSur, and that > works well too. > > > I have not tried to update the basiliskii and sheepshaver ports in MacPorts > in recent years, although no doubt it could be done without too much trouble. > Newer versions I note are using xcode to build, and that adds a layer of > complexity, and makes builds on older systems harder. > > > Perhaps the two ports might be retired, and people sent to upstream sources > to download prebuilt binaries instead. There are upstream versions available > that run as far back as 10.6.8 I believe. > >
