Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [epp-dev] Mac OS X: No 64-bit packages?

Just in case someone following or stumbling on this topic is not already aware: bug 281501 is tracking the request for 64-bit OS X builds: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=281501

Also, I've posted a screencast demo of how to (easily) construct your own copy of the package contents using the SDK build and the install wizard: http://bewarethepenguin.blogspot.com/2009/07/screencast-creating-eclipse-download.html

Eric


Reinier Zwitserloot wrote:
See

http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/epp-dev/msg00666.html

http://www.eclipse.org/newsportal/article.php?id=233&group=eclipse.technology.packaging#233

for some background.


You can't run eclipse in 64-bit mode on Mac OS X, because, even though the cocoa-64bit bindings are available, all the downloads on eclipse.org/download come in carbon (32-bit) and cocoa (32-bit) flavours. I can respect the need to keep the number of packages down, but this seems like the very worst possible combination! As you may know, java 1.6 on mac os x only runs in 64-bit mode. Therefore, with these packages you can run eclipse only in java 1.5, which is rather annoying:

 - java 1.6 is far faster than java 1.5.
- For those with the memory working on big projects, giving eclipse a tonne of memory is nice, but of course that can only work in a 64-bit JVM. - You can't use java 1.6 features when writing eclipse plugins for your own use.

I therefore suggest any one of the following steps:

1. Replace the packages with "carbon 32-bit" and "cocoa 64-bit". Apparently (see links at the top of this email) some people still need the carbon build, but nobody could possibly need the 32-bit cocoa build, as it's brand new!

2. Supply the 64-bit SWT jnilib and the 32-bit SWT jnilib in the same cocoa build, so that the cocoa build is 32/64-bit agnostic and runs on either. I presume this isn't as easy as it sounds otherwise someone would have undoubtedly done this already.

 --Reinier Zwitserloot

_______________________________________________
epp-dev mailing list
epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epp-dev



Back to the top