Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 5th Nov 2009 23:05 UTC
Linux As we all know, Mac OS X has support for what is called 'fat binaries'. These are binaries that can carry code for for instance multiple architectures - in the case of the Mac, PowerPC and x86. Ryan Gordon was working on an implementation of fat binaries for Linux - but due to the conduct of the Linux maintainers, Gordon has halted the effort.
Thread beginning with comment 393089
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
TYPO
by Elv13 on Thu 5th Nov 2009 23:09 UTC
Elv13
Member since:
2006-06-12

OSX binary are called universal binaries, not fat binaries

Reply Score: 0

RE: TYPO
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 5th Nov 2009 23:10 in reply to "TYPO"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Universal binaries are an implementation of the concept of fat binaries.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: TYPO
by memson on Fri 6th Nov 2009 10:56 in reply to "RE: TYPO"
memson Member since:
2006-01-01

That might be correct for NeXT, but Mac OS has also had FAT binaries since the days of 68000 to PPC conversion and they were implemented as this guy did - resources with in a single file. If you look at how NeXT solved this problem, it is a separate physical binary with in the .app folder hierarchy that represents the application. This is obviously conceptually similar, but not the same. From what I read, the guy had actually created a single binary file with a method for loading the correct binary section for the architecture/ABI being used. This is more like what Classic MacOS did - though people might wave the "resource" fork being at me, I guess. If you play the resource fork card, then this isn't the same at all and this guy probably was barking up an odd tree. To me it seems like the same idea though.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: TYPO
by Kroc on Thu 5th Nov 2009 23:31 in reply to "TYPO"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

OS X binaries were fat before they became universal. PPC 32-bit and PPC 64-bit code, and even in some cases targeting different code for G4 and G5. “Universal” binaries just added Intel to the fat mix, that was all.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: TYPO
by tyrione on Fri 6th Nov 2009 03:50 in reply to "TYPO"
tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

OSX binary are called universal binaries, not fat binaries


New name. Old History with NeXT.

Quad FAT from NeXTSTEP: m68 NeXTStation, x86, SPARC 5/10, HP PA-RISC 712/60 & 712/80i Gecko systems.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: TYPO
by memson on Fri 6th Nov 2009 11:01 in reply to "RE: TYPO"
memson Member since:
2006-01-01

Quad FAT from NeXTSTEP: m68 NeXTStation, x86, SPARC 5/10, HP PA-RISC 712/60 & 712/80i Gecko systems.


Win32 too, if you used the Yellowbox stuff. But they were still separate executables with in the .app folder hierarchy, right? Mac OS 7 up till 9 also had FAT binaries, and these included 68000 and PowerPC code in the same executable "file" via code resources.

Reply Parent Score: 2