On Jun 12, 2009, at 8:01 AM, gsw wrote:
> > On 12 Jun., 00:31, Craig Citro <craigci...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Could we make the intel/powerpc split more obvious, or add >>> instructions, or make just one directory with both? >> >> I vote a big +1 on one directory with both -- I think that'd be >> way easier. >> >> -cc > > Well, my proposal would be to have one subdirectory for the OS X 10.4 > versions (both Intel and PowerPC), one subdirectory for the OS X 10.5 > versions (again both Intel and PowerPC), and from September or so on, > one directory for the OS X 10.6 version (Intel only --- Apple might > not release this for PowerPC, IIRC). > > But the main problem remains nevertheless: up to now, there is no > consistent naming scheme. > > One has to distinguish between different OS X versions, one has to > distinguish between 32bit and 64bit versions (I do not know what the > current default here is for OS X 10.5, and I even do not know where to > look for this information), > one has to distinguish between Intel CPU and PowerPC CPU. > And even then, we had the problem that users reported that a certain > Sage "PowerPC" version did not work for them, because it had been > bdist'ed on a Mac with a PowerPC G5 CPU and MPIR was taking advantage > of that, but they were using Macs with a G3 or G4 CPU, and so that > bdist didn't work for them. > > Therefore, the OS X 10.4 versions I produce since Sage 3.4 are created > with (for the current 4.0.1, say): > > ./sage -bdist 4.0.1-OSX10.4-32bit > > on my Core2Duo Intel Macbook, this gives: > > sage-4.0.1-OSX10.4-32bit-i386-Darwin.dmg > > and on my old PowerBook (with a G4 CPU) I issue: > > ./sage -bdist 4.0.1-OSX10.4-32bit-G4 > > and this gives: > > sage-4.0.1-OSX10.4-32bit-G4-PowerMacintosh-Darwin.dmg > > Note that the "sage-" at the front and the "-i386-Darwin" resp. "- > PowerMacintosh-Darwin" are added automatically. Now if you look at the > OS X download directories, you will notice many more variations, e.g. > with a superfluous "Intel" or "INTEL" in their name, but missing the > information whether it is a 32bit build or a 64bit build ... > > In the not too distant future, it makes sense to provide the (future) > OS X 10.6 Sage version "one level up" on the Sage Mac download page, > because it will probably be both "Intel" only and "64bit" only. > > But till then, IMHO we first should agree on a consistent naming > scheme (and means to automate its usage, and really use it, ...), > before changing the directory structure that the users currently are > acquainted to. > > Cheers, > gsw > > > P.S.: > And I didn't even tell you yet about all the Sage "Mac App" variants > of the Sage versions above :-) > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
