On 10 Jun 2013, at 09:22, Bruce Tulloch wrote:
What is the *recommended* way to build and package a shared library
for OSX?
Our aim is that ordinary users can "just install it" such that other
applications that depend on the library "just run" (without requiring
authors of those other applications to include a copy of the library
in
their bundle or users to fiddle with command line command to
configure them
if they don't).
The above is the non-recommended way. The recommended way is to have
application packagers include the library (or framework) within their
application bundle in order to prevent version conflicts or the
absence of the correct version on the system to cause problems. And to
give them the ability to just copy the application from one system to
another and have it keep working without having to hunt everywhere for
other components they also have to copy (although this is not possible
for all applications, for most it is).
This library facilitates low level I/O. There are no UI or other
resources
but it has headers for those who want to build apps against it. If
this
were just UNIX we'd put under /usr/lib (and /use/include and perhaps
/usr/share) but doing this this seems to be discouraged when reading
the
Apple's developer docs.
Under Mac OS X (and *BSD, and probably even most Linux distributions
these days), you would put it under /usr/local/[lib,include,share]. /
usr/lib etc are reserved for system usage.
We don't want to depend on MacPorts, Fink or Brew etc. Should we be
packaging this as a framework, albeit a simple one?
If you absolutely want to distribute it as a standalone framework, you
would generally install it under /Library/Frameworks or under /Library/
Application Support/YourProductName.
Jonas
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
