On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, jiho wrote:
(I'm talking past you here, sorry). What I meant was: Is it not the case that the fink libraries have no support for Universal Binaries? If so, I think that we have to take a decision to cut adrift from the fink project (as an interim measure) this summer, that is, as of now; because I thnk that we do need a one-step way of building Universal Binaries.
Fink seems to separate PPC and x86 architectures indeed. I remarked that the second release dmg for Inkscape (0.44-1) is marked as universal while the first one was not (if I remember well). Michael can you explain how this is done? Is it all automatized in osxapp.sh? Thanks in advance for your lights.
No, it is not yet automated. But I will cleanup the script I've been using and add it to SVN soon. How it is done is to take two complete release .dmg packages, each built on a different architecture type (x86 and ppc). These need to be built on machines that have the same set of fink packages installed. Then, you put the two .app trees in a directory and name them Inkscape_x86.app and Inkscape_ppc.app. Next you copy one of those, naming it Inkscape.app (the universal one). After that, you run through all the files that differ between the x86 and ppc tree, checking they have all the same set of files, and if they are .dylib, .a, .so, or executable files, then run lipo to create a universal version of them: lipo $INTEL/$FILE $PPC/$FILE -create -output $UNIVERSAL/$FILE Then check the process worked!
I aggree with needing a one-step way of building Universal Binaries. The way we're doing it is phone to errors and requires a lot of checking--it is really a short-term solution. If anyone is going to investigate building GTK 2.8 and all its dependencies outside of fink, then that would be a good time to try configuring and building all of them as universal.
Cheers, Michael