On Jan 22, 2009, at 2:39 PM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Jan 22, 2009, at 4:12 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: Lots of people have been doing network shares of applications for
decades. Who else is using custom file extensions? I've never seenpython, java, ...
Um, Java .jar is the same on all platforms. And JNI files are .jnilib
on Mac OS X regardless of CPU, and .dll on Windows regardless of CPU.
AFAIK, Windows DLLs are .dll regardless of whether they are 32-bit or
64-bit. Even GNU/Linux .so and .a files are the same regardless of CPU.
it. NeXTSTEP/Mac OS X has been doing this since '94, and their
solution has been fat binaries all with the same extension. That
is what universal binaries are today. It's proven to work well.ok: here is a feature request for fat binaries including linux
(i386, x86_64) and windows (i386) binaries.
I wasn't saying anything about GNU/Linux or Windows. I was talking
Mac OS X. .pd_darwin is all that is needed. .d_fat, etc cause more
troubles than the fix.
.hc
Access to computers should be unlimited and total. - the hacker ethic