This repository has been archived by the owner. It is now read-only.

support building via xcode for mac #4020

Closed
ry opened this Issue Sep 14, 2012 · 10 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
4 participants

ry commented Sep 14, 2012

chrome uses xcode for mac builds - we should too
cc @tjfontaine @TooTallNate @isaacs

The first trivial fix is to comment out 'GCC_VERSION': '4.2', in common.gypi

To build successfully first build the postmortem-metadata configuration, then All (node)

I am working on trying to figure out why the dependency chain isn't working properly, and also a pull request that adds an option to configure and Makefile

This would be sweet if the gyp XCode build supports real fat binary compilations. That would cut down on the package build times a lot and make @isaacs' life easier.

The only problem I see there is that we hard-code process.arch via a command-line define (-DARCH=x64), which wouldn't work so well if we were compiling both archs at once. We could introduce some "smart" logic to detect the proper arch in the source code like here: https://gist.github.com/3723332

@TooTallNate #4022 is certainly a step towards getting "proper" fat binaries, but since gyp is still generating the project files I think we'll have to figure out a way to manually generate a configuration that includes fat

ry commented Sep 22, 2012

progress?

@TooTallNate the stumbling block to fat binaries in a single compilation pass is the fact that openssl includes different files based on target arch, so openssl would need to be built twice and lipo'd to support using it in the linking pass for node.

This commit: tjfontaine/node@61578c6

keeps being blown away since it's not been upstreamed, and maybe it never will be.

As an alternative we could do this:

paddybyers/node@9efd361

There's some more discussion here:

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en%3Fhl%3Den&fromgroups=#!topic/nodejs/87svGdbbH0s

That seems like a good solution, I will verify today and hopefully have that fixed

@paddybyers I've submitted your change as a pr (#5209) with a slightly reworded commit log

I'm going to go ahead and close this, works the same as before, just build postmortem first

@tjfontaine tjfontaine closed this Dec 7, 2013

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.