XCode and Intel/PowerPC Builds

[TI-994A]

I hope someone can help in clearing up this confusion. I'll break it up into separate points:

1. Do the latest versions of PureBasic still support compiling to both Intel and PowerPC binaries?

2. Are different versions of XCode required for Intel and PowerPC compilations?

3. Can PureBasic running on an Intel machine compile to PowerPC binaries?


Any feedback will be highly appreciated.

Thank you.

[jesperbrannmark]

I think you need a powerpc to build powerpc and a intel to build intel - but i am not at all sure on that. Did you try to do it?

[dhouston]

I asked more or less the same question recently and got no response from the PB team.

• http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 19&t=46483

AFAIK, you need both PPC and Intel to compile for both and there are different versions of Xcode as later versions will not work under PPC (Search the support pages for the latest versions for each. I cannot recall details as I did this about a year back. You might find details in some of my posts here) .

However, there are major problems with the PPC version. Again, there has been no response from anyone on the PB team. I certainly would not recommend anybody buy a PPC machine just to compile for that platform (as I did) until these issues are resolved. And, I've quit recommending PB as a development platform as a result of the unresponsiveness of the PB team to these and other issues.

• http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 24&t=44231
  http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 15&t=45594
  http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 15&t=43704

To make matters worse, the PB web site still claims full support for PPC. PB looked very promising about 5 years ago. It looks much less promising today and at the age of 70 and in ill health, my patience is on life support.

PS: How can I get demoted to UN-Enthusiast?

[jesperbrannmark]

Sad you feel like that dhouston...
I on the other hand would like to be upgraded to mega-enthusiast. I also see some issues with not getting my need for answers answered straight away in a correct format etc. I on the other hand would be willing to pay much much more for Purebasic, and thats what it all comes down to - money.

Ps. I have customers that love me and I have customers that hate me (not so much in between from what I hear - strange you only hear one or the other), and my mental survival strategy is "Do not let the negative few overrule the positive many.".

[TI-994A]

Thanks for the feedback. Nevertheless, it seems that this issue lacks any real tested results. The best and most recent indication on the matter is from Mr Timo Harter (@freak). He suggests that while both the PPC and x86 versions of PureBasic are required for compiling to the respective platforms, the PPC version of PureBasic can run and compile on an x86 machine within the Rosetta emulator.

...compile your code once with the x86 and once with the ppc version...

...compile the ppc version separately and also test it separately (can be done with Rosetta)...

Unfortunately, there was no mention of XCode version requirements and/or compatibilities. If anyone has any hands-on experience with this XCode issue, your feedback will be wonderful.

Thank you.

[dhouston]

I loaned my PPC machine to an acquaintance who had a use for it but I believe XCode 2.5 is the latest version that works under PPC whereas the latest version of XCode (4.?) works under Intel.

[TI-994A]

I loaned my PPC machine to an acquaintance who had a use for it but I believe XCode 2.5 is the latest version that works under PPC whereas the latest version of XCode (4.?) works under Intel.

Who better to ask than actual Apple developers.

It seems that only versions of XCode below 3.2.6 will support PPC development. The good news is that two separate versions of XCode can be installed on the same machine. Now, all we need to know is how PureBasic interacts with XCode, and whether these version restrictions would apply to its compilations.

The million-dollar question remains if PureBasic still reliably supports true cross-platform development across Windows, Apple x86 and Apple PPC.

Anyone?

[aaron]

The million-dollar question remains if PureBasic still reliably supports true cross-platform development across Windows, Apple x86 and Apple PPC.

Really, the question is more like "Why the heck should PureBasic support PPC?". The last powerPC mac was released in 2005.... 6 years ago. Apple no longer supports PPC with their OS, their compilers and soon the Rosetta emulation layer will be gone. The PPC support seems to be a dead horse at this point.

Why would Fred and co. pour support into a dead platform?

Better to simply remove PPC support from the supported list on the newest release and call it a day.

[TI-994A]

Really, the question is more like "Why the heck should PureBasic support PPC?". The last powerPC mac was released in 2005.... 6 years ago. Apple no longer supports PPC with their OS, their compilers and soon the Rosetta emulation layer will be gone. The PPC support seems to be a dead horse at this point.

Why would Fred and co. pour support into a dead platform?

Better to simply remove PPC support from the supported list on the newest release and call it a day.

Hi aaron. Thanks for your feedback.

In the big picture, you've made some valid and reasonable points. However, in the smaller scheme of things, dwindling support for the PPC platform could equate to a niche market. Bigger players might feel that such a small user base may not be a viability, but these few million users can prove to be a goldmine to smaller developers (like us).

While the PPC is far from being a dead horse, your point begs the question of the Amiga, which has a far smaller user base. This is accredited to the core culture of PureBasic, which caters to this unique hobbyist/gamer market.

The PureBasic team has done a wonderful job thus far. Even compared to some of the leading RAD tools available today, PureBasic is, hands down, a far better development platform. And there is no need for the team to pour support into the PPC version; only to continue its existing support. There should be no reason why newer versions of PureBasic should include PPC development, as long as the older versions, which do, are still available. As it is, we already have to use separate compilers to build Intel x86 and PowerPC binaries.

Which brings us back to the original question: does PureBasic reliably support true cross-platform development across Windows, Apple x86 and Apple PPC? This question seems to raise some confusion, so, perhaps a rephrasing might be prudent.

The main concern is not future support, but rather reliable functionality. While there may not be doubts about PureBasic's functionality on the Windows platform, the overall consensus (in the forums) tend to point to a broken compiler that does not really build to Apple x86 or PPC reliably; and the sluggish lack of responses to such issues further fans this opinion.

It wouldn't be preferable to go through the PureBasic learning curve, only to find out that it would not cross-compile as expected. A definitive indication from the PureBasic team would really be reassuring and appreciated.

Thanks again.