Re: Ubuntu and Debian packages / 2013-07-07

[Wolfgang Lux]

Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote:

> 
> On 9 Jul 2013, at 07:37, Graham Lee <graham@iamleeg.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 9 Jul 2013, at 05:34, "Richard Frith-Macdonald" 
>> <richardfrithmacdonald@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> I'd appreciate any information from OSX coders about what we should 
>>> actually be doing.
>> 
>> Hi Richard,
>> 
>> Here's one explanation of the macros from someone within Apple:
>> 
>> http://lists.apple.com/archives/xcode-users/2005/Aug/msg00399.html
>> 
>> …min_allowed and …max_defined act as sort of brackets for client code to 
>> select different paths based on what OS X SDK they're compiling for.
>> 
>> To me, it doesn't make sense for GNUstep to define them. On 
>> apple-apple-apple, API availability is determined by the Apple frameworks. 
>> On gnu-gnu-gnu, API availability is a moving target, and something that 
>> doesn't correspond cleanly to any one Apple release, now or at any other 
>> time.
>> 
>> My suggestion would be for such tests to consistently pass or fail in 
>> GNUstep, with recommendation that people who have code that depends on them 
>> have a condition that explicitly satisfies #ifdef GNUSTEP with behaviour 
>> correct for the release of -base/-GUI they're using.
> 
> Thanks ... that's kind of what I thought the position was when I removed the 
> define of MAC_OS_X_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED
> So maybe IK was right, and I should remove it again.
> 
> But ... what about people porting OSX code to GNUstep?  If we define this 
> then presumably there's a bigger chance that they can just take their OSX 
> source and compile it unchanged.

I'd say we should define this macro and set it to the highest OS X version 
whose APIs we currently support. 

Wolfgang