Re: [gtk-osx-users] Support for ancient MacOS versions?

[G 3 <programmingkidx gmail com>]

On Jan 12, 2017, at 12:16 PM, John Ralls wrote:

> > On Jan 12, 2017, at 8:50 AM, G 3 <programmingkidx gmail com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jan 12, 2017, at 11:02 AM, John Ralls wrote:
> >
> > > A post yesterday from someone actually trying to build Gtk on a  
> > > Tiger system raises a question I've been mulling for some time:
> > >
> > > Is it time to pull the plug on the older versions of MacOS?
> >
> > NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
> >
> > > When I took over the project from Richard in 2009 Snow Leopard  
> > > was the current OS X release, and Tiger, which was and still is  
> > > the minimum "supported" version for gtk-osx, was 5 years old. It  
> > > being only two versions "out of date", it made some amount of  
> > > sense to continue to support it. There were still a lot of PPC  
> > > macs around and Snow Leopard didn't support them.
> > >
> > > That was almost 8 years ago, and much has changed. In particular,  
> > > Xcode 7 and MacOS10.9.sdk introduced a new linkage system that  
> > > allows one to build binaries that run on any system from 10.6 on  
> > > by passing the oldest version you want to --macosx-version-min.  
> > > Clang has matured into a pretty good compiler, especially  
> > > compared to the buggy llvm-gcc compilers of Xcode 4.x. Packages  
> > > which include mac-specific code often require patching to be able  
> > > to build with the older SDKs and compilers. Maintaining all of  
> > > that takes effort and I don't think that there are a lot of users  
> > > who benefit from it.
> > >
> > > In fact given today's security environment I think that  
> > > supporting ancient and no-longer updated MacOS versions is a  
> > > disservice to users, who might get the message that it's OK to  
> > > expose their insecure systems to the internet because someone out  
> > > there still supports their system.
> >
> > "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little  
> > temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" Benjamin  
> > Franklin. Yes there are a lot of people out there who are paranoid  
> > and afraid that someone is coming to get them, but we can still  
> > cater to both the paranoid and the sane.
> >
> > > So I'm inclined to change the support policy to 5 years,  
> > > effective on the fifth anniversary of Mountain Lion's release on  
> > > 16 February; meaning that after that gtk-osx won't actively  
> > > support building on systems older than Mountain Lion; on 10 June  
> > > 2018 the minimum supported system will be Mavericks, and so on.
> >
> > You sound like Apple. This is GTK. Having it support more versions  
> > means more people can enjoy it.
> >
> > > The immediate impact will be removing all of the ppc-related and  
> > > pre-10.8 special case code from jhbuildrc-gtk-osx. Over time I'd  
> > > also weed out patches and modules which enable building on now  
> > > unsupported versions of OS X.
> > >
> > > Comments?
> >
> > Please please keep Mac OS 10.4 support. The very reason why I was  
> > interested in GTK was the fact it still supported Mac OS 10.4. I  
> > admit there aren't a lot of us PowerPC users around, but we like  
> > using software just like you. We want to be able to use GTK also.  
> > Apple's Cocoa framework is nasty to use when making the interface  
> > by code. I was hoping something like GTK would be a good replacement.
> >
> > I will be more than happy to help you support GTK on Tiger.
>
>
> First off, no, this isn't Gtk. This is a facility for developers of  
> Gnome applications to build the dependencies for their programs on  
> Macs, to enable using the Mac menus, and to bundle the app into a  
> draggable bundle for installation. What Gnome application do you  
> develop? How many known 10.4 users do you have?

I think I am a little confused by this not being GTK. The list I am  
sending this email to is called gtk-osx-users-list. I am a new user  
of GTK so I don't have too much experience with it yet.

> As for Gtk, they accepted a change *last year* which requires *in  
> the configure script* at least MacOS X 10.9. That's currently  
> patched around in gtk-osx and the patch has been ignored by the Gtk  
> development team. Gtk-4 is going to require GL and modern  
> accelerated graphics. It's very unlikely to work at all on older  
> hardware, and by older I mean anything that can't run Sierra.

That is unfortunate.

> Meanwhile, connecting insecure computers to the net represents a  
> threat not just to the user but to the entire net: Consider the  
> recent DDoS attacks using enormous botnets of IoT devices. If you  
> insist on maintaining that old PPC box, put Linux on it so that you  
> can get current certificates and security patches. Don't run an  
> unsupported OS on the net! That, by the way, is not Apple's "party  
> line", it's a common refrain of senior Gnome developers.
>
> You haven't thus far demonstrated even the ability to *use* gtk- 
> osx. How are you going to help me maintain it?


I have compiled applications that have multiple dependencies to them  
and have made those applications distributable by changing and  
including their needed dylib's so that all the user has to do is  
unzip the application and copy it to their hard drive. Is there any  
easier way to distribute an application? This method takes literally  
seconds to do. It looks like a Mac OS X user is required to build the  
GTK library itself in order to use it. I suggest we build a library  
that is simple to download and install. It only takes one user to  
make a distributable library that everyone could use. I have always  
built applications via the "configure ; make ; make install" method.  
The jhbuild way of doing things is new to me, but I do see its  
advantages. With a little more help I could get to the point where I  
could make this distributable library for you.