Hi, I will readily admit that I am naive in terms of some of the subtleties, but would running Leopard under Lion in a VM be a suitable possibility?
It would seem that with Lion, some of the licensing issues relative to running non-server versions of the older OSX distributions under a VM have changed, at least that it what is intimated by an article here for VMWare Fusion: http://www.macworld.com/article/1163755/vmware_fusion_update_lets_users_virtualize_leopard_snow_leopard.html Not sure if that is helpful, but recalled seeing some discussions on this over the past few months or so. Regards, Marc Schwartz On Apr 13, 2012, at 12:34 PM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote: > Thanks, that is bad news. > > I really don't want to ask our sysadmins to maintain a Leopard system for the > very limited amount of package building we do, so we'll have to hope this > suffices. > > On 13/04/2012 18:05, Simon Urbanek wrote: >> >> On Apr 13, 2012, at 11:36 AM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote: >> >>> I have hitherto used a Leopard system to build Mac binary packages >>> for distribution, but that system has died and we only have Lion >>> systems left (and the replacement hardware only runs Lion). I'm >>> only concerned with building i386/x86_64 packages. >>> >>> We saw problems with packages built on Snow Leopard which would not >>> run on Leopard, and the trick was to use -mmacosx-version-min=10.5 >>> for compiling and linking. >>> >> >> It is only partially sufficient. The min version makes sure that the >> Mach-O output is 10.5-compatible, but it will still happily use >> Lion-only libraries when linking. You have to use 10.5 SDK (typically >> via -isysroot) in order to make sure the linked frameworks and >> libraries are actually compatible and present on Leopard. >> >> I have at some point contemplated building the R releases and >> packages on SL with the 10.5 SDK, but it is simply too fragile. There >> are issues in details of dependencies, such as packages that use >> configuration scripts to determine flags (like gsl-config) -- you'd >> have to maintain a full system and worry about paths (linker/include >> paths may work with -isysroot re-direction but any other paths >> won't). >> >> That said, it is possible to build R itself that way. I'd even argue >> that it's better to simply create pre-drivers for compilers that >> automatically add the corresponding -isysroot et al. and then exec >> the compiler rather than setting the flags fully. >> >> >> >>> Does anyone know for certain if that suffices? And does setting >>> the environment variable MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET to 10.5 do the >>> same thing? (My man pages suggest so, but I don't trust Apple's >>> documentation to be current.) >>> >> >> AFAIK, yes, but it is equally insufficient. Apple has been warning >> about the env vars for a while that they may get rid of them, but I >> dont' think they did so far (there were more useful ones for managing >> sysroot which I think they got rid of by now). >> >> Best, Simon >> _______________________________________________ R-SIG-Mac mailing list [email protected] https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-mac
