but i don't really see how it would help with fat binaries.
Two solutions that come to my mind:
1) just use an ugly folder name:
foo.pd/darwin-amd64-32.darwin-arm64-32/foo.dylib
Typically, the user won't see it :-)
2) use a special specifier for universal binaries:
foo.pd/darwin-universal-32/foo.dylib
On 30.03.2022 16:33, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
On 3/30/22 16:16, Christof Ressi wrote:
i do not want to have zexy.darwin-amd64-32.darwin-arm64-32.so
maybe a bundle structure (as described in
https://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2022-03/022997.html)
might not be such a bad idea after all?
maybe.
it solves problems like auxiliary libraries and keeps the directory
reasonably clean.
but i don't really see how it would help with fat binaries.
dgfmsfa
IOhannes
_______________________________________________
Pd-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
_______________________________________________
Pd-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
