I'm not going to argue OS politics, again use what works best for you. I can understand the frustration with how the build system works on OSX. It is actually really nice in a lot of ways but it took me a while to get the hang of it after switching from Linux.
Without counting Debian, I still think there's really no need at this point to support a PPC build for OSX. When I wrote "drop PPC support" in earlier emails, I was referring only to OSX. The code as it is now should compile just fine on Debian PPC since the only architecture differences as far as I know would be compiling for little endian versus big endian on Intel. I don't think there are any architecture specific assembly / function calls in Pd. So in the end, dropping OSX PPC support helps in simplifying the build scripts at least. Again, I think there's really no need to host newer Pd OSX PPC binaries, just leave the last one there since anyone using it will be on a much older version of OSX anyway. On Oct 22, 2013, at 5:05 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> Also, do you have any references for the claim that the vast majority of OSX >>> users have moved away from PPC? >> >> http://update.omnigroup.com/ (Hardware / CPU type): Intel 97.8% PPC 2.2% >> >> https://www.adium.im/sparkle/ (CPU type): Intel 97.83% PPC 2.71% > > Thanks. Those are low numbers, but I'd imagine the number of PPC users is > still fairly high: > http://www.statisticbrain.com/apple-computer-company-statistics/ > >> >>> I find Jobs' claim that Apple doesn't ship >>> junk to generally be true, and combined with their development model the >>> unfortunate result would seem to be that poor people still using their once >>> sleek and sexy devices are ignored along with their now ugly, unprofitable >>> devices. >> >> Well, those "sleek and sexy" PPC devices were last made & sold in 2005, so >> it's not a surprise the vast majority of people using OSX have Intel >> machines mainly because software developers (& the OS) have moved on to 32 >> bit and now 64 bit intel years ago. > > Debian supports PPC, no? Anyone know how it does on the old machines? I > suppose since Pd is in the repos one could say it still supports PPC. :) > >> >> Your political bias notwithstanding (I say use what works for you), > > Well, I'd call it a political stance. And where it seemed quirky and deeply > personal when I first adopted it, it now seems simply to be a restatement > of the scientific method for computer security, at a time when there have > been revelations that show our computers really need to be as secure as > possible against attacks. > > I'd also point out that yours is a political stance. While I understand > it, I must disagree with it because in terms of security it is much more > difficult to use the scientific method to check whether the specs actually > fit the implementation. In some cases on proprietary OSes neither are > known so you're forced to reverse engineer the software, and for > complex systems that's too time consuming and expensive to do. -------- Dan Wilcox @danomatika danomatika.com robotcowboy.com
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
