[Vm-dev] MacOS vs MacOSX?

Casey Ransberger casey.obrien.r at gmail.com
Thu Jun 5 15:42:10 UTC 2014


…although in recent years the term "fat binary" has been replaced with the
term "universal binary" in parity with Apple's current obsession with
emaciated computers! :D


On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>
wrote:

>
> On 05.06.2014, at 17:31, gettimothy <gettimothy at zoho.com> wrote:
>
> From your response, that implies...
>
> MacOS32Motorolla6800V3   (even though M6800 is an 8 bit machine--ah...we
> covered this in Computer Architecture and Design....Complex instruction
> set....little black cockroach looking thing)
>
>
> 68000 is 32 bits.
>
> MacOS32PowerPCV3          (32 bit RISC)
> MacOSX32x86                      (which we currently have)
> MacOSX32ia64                      (which we don't have)
>
>
> On the GNU build tree, I will leave this unchanged. (unless Eliot wants
> them)
>
> On the CMake side, I will add those things.
>
>
> Well ... the "real" Mac VMs usually come as fat binaries. A single VM
> supports both PowerPC and Intel. E.g. Etoys (which includes the Mac VM)
> runs fine on both PowerPC and new Macs.
>
>
> - Bert -
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/attachments/20140605/52a112c3/attachment.htm


More information about the Vm-dev mailing list