using my cmake setup in the jit_expr project I was able to build just now for 10.9 but no lower, going below 10.9 didn't allow it to find the std::shared_ptr maybe I can get lower somehow? Either way, this should be more useful for more people :)
Thanks for the info Dan! On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Dan Wilcox <danomat...@gmail.com> wrote: > Also, if you're targeting C++11, I think you'll have to use a min of at > least 10.7 (from https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7482026/can-i- > use-the-latest-features-of-c11-in-xcode-4-or-osx-lion). > > One thing we've noticed is that Pd builds on my machine running 10.13 > don't seems to work on 10.6-10.7 systems, so the deployment target is > really a suggestion at best. You'll have to do some testing but it's hard > to hit *everyone* and honestly the vast majority of users fall within the > newest to maybe 3 versions before anyway (ie. 10.10 - 10.13 now). > > For plain C/C++, you can have a relatively old deployment target. It's > really more important for macOS app development using the Apple frameworks > ie. stuff like the changes from QT to AVFoundation, etc. > > > On Mar 19, 2018, at 10:07 PM, Dan Wilcox <danomat...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The compiler builds for the current system by default. You have to set the > min deployment target when building. > > Add this flag to you makefile: --mmacosx-version-min=10.6 > > The current version for Pd is 10.6 which is the first version that > supported i386 (ie. Intel processors). > > On Mar 19, 2018, at 12:00 PM, pd-dev-requ...@lists.iem.at wrote: > > From: Miller Puckette <m...@ucsd.edu> > To: Alex <x37v.a...@gmail.com> > Cc: pd-dev <pd-dev@lists.iem.at> > Subject: Re: [PD-dev] Mac SDK version for externals > Message-ID: <20180319015755.GY7620@elroy.localdomain> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > This is a very interesting and useful question. > > At the outset of PD I only worried about having it run on the "current" > platforms: Redhat 5.2, Windows 95, and when it arrived, MacOS 10.2. Older > platforms weren't important. > > Since then I've tried to keep back compatibility to whatever those > bleeding-edge > OSes were, because I assume people can't always afford machine upgrades. > But > I haven't tried to extend Pd (Or "extra" objects) backward past the > original > dates. > > At the moment I can only compile back to OSX 10.5 (PPC) and Windows XP; I > don't have real or virtual machines that go back further. > > So my suggestion would be: make it work on today's OSes, and try to keep it > alive on them, but don't worry too hard about older ones. I don't think > I'm > ever going to be tempted to compile Pd for Windows 3.1. > > cheers > Miller > > > -------- > Dan Wilcox > @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika> > danomatika.com > robotcowboy.com > > > > > -------- > Dan Wilcox > @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika> > danomatika.com > robotcowboy.com > > > >
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@lists.iem.at https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
