One could put multiple copies of oorexx into the .dmg file, and then let the installer select the correct/best binary to install.
Sent by Magic! > On Jun 7, 2021, at 7:37 AM, CV Bruce <cvbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Now that I think about it rexx.img was the primary problem. It contains > executable code, but is not in a library format. You can’t even combine x86 > and amd64 into one binary. > > There was probably a good reason why rexx.img was implemented (speed or > space?). > > Perhaps it’s time to talk about eliminating or replacing it with something > more standard. > > Bruce > > Sent by Magic! > >> On Jun 7, 2021, at 7:22 AM, CV Bruce <cvbr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> The last time I looked at this, probably ppc/x86, it wasn’t possible >> because Rexx is invoked during the build. There are tools to combine >> single binaries into “universal” binaries, but what your are really asking >> is can OORexx be cross compiled for a non-native architecture. Even then >> there were, if I remember correctly, problems with the Rexx.img file. >> Bruce >> >> Sent by Magic! >> >>>> On Jun 7, 2021, at 5:30 AM, Rony G. Flatscher <rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at> >>>> wrote: >>> >>> As Apple has been selling new hardware with a proper processor, it would >>> be important to support >>> that hardware platform. >>> >>> In the past Apple allowed for "fat binaries" which included binaries for >>> different hardware >>> architectures in the same file. Would it be possible with CMake to have >>> such ooRexx "fat binaries" >>> created for the MacOS platform? If so, how would one be able to achieve >>> that? >>> >>> ---rony >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Oorexx-devel mailing list >>> Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel _______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
