[quote=tperry2x post_id=3469 time=1694372468 user_id=1657]
The nice thing is, because 9.6.1, 9.6.2 and 9.6.3 are all community versions, we can compare between them and probably port any bug fixes over to 9.6.1 from 9.6.3 whilst not losing 32bit build targets for MacOS X. I'm keen not to lose any bug fixes that might be available to us.
[/quote]

This is great work guys, I had just assumed that Mac 32bit standalone was cut from the build process with 9.0.0, never bothered as far as checking every minor version going back. I'm really surprised that this was still in 9.6.1!

We definitely be able to modify 9.6.3's standalone builder to reenable 32bit Mac builds. Just take the 'fat' binary from the 9.6.1 mac standalone template folder and use 'Lipo' command line (same as the SB script did before) to strip off the 64bit slice leaving only 32bit binary. Then modify the script to use that for 32bit builder and use 9.6.3 standalone for 64bit builder. We couldn't do 32/64 'fat' standalones that way, but at least we could still deploy for macOS 10.6 through 10.8 if you needed or wanted to.

I actually did do some poking around with this idea, in the SB settings stack already last time I was editing that stack. As I said before I'd like to even provide older versions engines if there are no other available for a given platform, then give warning and force resaving stack in the older format if necessary. This way we could have a v7 Linux ARM build option, or a v.6 PowerPC build option, we already have the built binaries for these so it's just a matter of modifying the Standalone Builder scripts and UI.

I was actually just thinking it would be neat to add-in a OXT Decker mini-IDE and Standalone Builder for it. Decker is a liberal MIT licensed, so no conflict there. Decker has some really interesting design goals, targeting even extremely low-powered hardware with minimal dependencies. I'd bet that could even be built to run on classic macOS 8 or BeOS (or Haiku).

That installer window doesn't look like a standard installer (it's not a PKG file, so not handed by MacOS). Looks like something built in house, or a third party tool.
If you get info on it, I wonder if it's a mindvision installer (popular at the time), InstallerVISE or even if it's a Livecode standalone itself).

Either way. It might write it's installer log to the Console log in Utilities. That might give you a clue to what was installed and where.

And here's something that doesn't seem to make much sense on MacOS 10.7 ['Tired Lion']:
-
[attachment=1]Screen Shot 2023-09-12 at 2.08.03 pm.png[/attachment]
-
It says it has been installed:
-
[attachment=0]Screen Shot 2023-09-12 at 2.12.43 pm.png[/attachment]
-
But locating the thing is proving difficult.

The PowerPC Player was just exactly that: it could run stacks that had been developed before 2011 (the date stamp on the installer).

The installer icon shows up as one of those attractive dark green things that LC abandoned after 5.5:
-
[attachment=0]Screen Shot 2023-09-12 at 1.51.36 pm.png[/attachment]
-

Unfortunately, from Thursday until next Monday I shall be away in the southern uplands of Bulgaria at Smolyan doing some lecturing in Phonetics at a branch of the Uni' my wife works at: and will only have my Xubuntu 64-bit and my Debian 32-bit laptops with me, so no chance to 'monkey around' with either of my PPC Macs.

However as far as I remember, and stated somewhere hereabouts, the LAST Mac PPC version of LC was somewhere around 6.5.

A whole slew of really useful features came in the version 7 series,

[Sanskrit nutters like me got very happy with the Unicode stuff introduced towards the end of the 7 series]

and for those who 'get all moist around the points' about widgets: those came with the 8 series.

Interestingly, is there (was there) a 9.6.1 PPC 'player'?
https://archive.org/download/live-code-community-installer-mac/LiveCodePlayer-R9-PowerPC.dmg
Did this mean that 9.6.1 could be made to deploy standalones to MacOS 10.5? ...or am I being fanciful here?

Brilliant, thanks Mic.
Anyone got links for the 9.6.1 community editions for Linux *x32 and x64? -- as linux folks might want to build 32bit mac standalones if we were to use 9.6.1 community as a base?

What about this for Mac

https://archive.org/download/live-code-community-installer-mac/LiveCodeCommunity-9_6_1-Mac.dmg

Mic

Found the Windows 64bit version here
https://web.archive.org/web/20201111235709/https://livecodestatic.com/downloads/livecode/9_6_1/LiveCodeCommunityInstaller-9_6_1-Windows-x86_64.exe
On that page, the Mac and Linux links seem to be incomplete. I'll keep looking...

Can't find 9.6.1 anywhere anymore, but I'm guessing you had it at one point Richmond.
https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?t=34532
Any chance you downloaded 9.6.1 community for Mac, Windows and Linux at the time?
Is there any chance you still have all the installers?

Hmm... Hopefully we can find download links for 9.6.1, for the community versions?
I'll gladly do the file swap thing, to make it into the 'lite' hack if you can find them.

Currently doing this from a phone, and it's hard work.

The nice thing is, because 9.6.1, 9.6.2 and 9.6.3 are all community versions, we can compare between them and probably port any bug fixes over to 9.6.1 from 9.6.3 whilst not losing 32bit build targets for MacOS X. I'm keen not to lose any bug fixes that might be available to us.

You could then rightly say we are supporting more macs than might currently be on the Sonoma beta.
(Just that we are supporting more macs with OXT than LC are... but in the other direction) :lol:

I had another idea about Sonoma. If you could do a system snapshot of Sonoma before installing xcode 14, then compare what files get added after installing xcode, you'd then have a pretty good idea of what was tripping up OXT, by comparing what was missing beforehand.
Either that, or use something like Pacifist to inspect the installer package of Xcode and see what system components are added.

You'd then know what to correct at the OXT compilation stage... A lot of work and definitely a case of detective work to figure that bit out. That approach might work though. Seems logical to me at least.

So will LC 961 . . .

BUT 962 Will NOT.

So, ideally OXT should be based on 961 and NOT 963.

Wow! That possibility is still possible with LC 960:
-
[attachment=0]Screen Shot 2023-09-10 at 12.35.53.png[/attachment]

Ah: one of those Compare & Contrast exercises beloved by EFL teacher types like myself . . .

Let's take a peep at the LiveCode User Guide PDF thing for LC 905:
-
[attachment=1]Screen Shot 2023-09-10 at 11.38.56.png[/attachment]
-
Well, swipe me sideways: someone actually managed to change the date (and the date ONLY) between the 905 and the 963 versions.

BUT, the screenshot of the standalone builder does NOT even reflect the reality of the builder in 905:
-
[attachment=0]Screen Shot 2023-09-10 at 11.42.29.png[/attachment]

Typically the LiveCode User Guide contained in LC 963 is unhelpful to say the least as it tells you you can build a Mac 32-bit standalone woth 963, which you cannot:
-
[attachment=0]Screen Shot 2023-09-10 at 11.30.54.png[/attachment]
-
That company seems to specialise in inaccurate documentation!

The simple fact that a screenshot from 2106 of the LC standalone builder in a document dated July 2021 tells you what a lazy, lackadaisical bunch they are [or, at least, whoever FFS compiled that PDF].

Currently downloading LCs 905 and 950 working on the hypothesis that the jump from 0.5 to 5.0 may have signalled the end of 32-bit builds.

One of the advantages of MacOS is that one can run the LC apps straight out of their disk images instead of having to go through all the installation rigmarole.

So here we are at last [takes donkey's ages to download from the internet archive].

905 WILL produce a 32-bit standalone.

950 WILL produce a 32-bit standalone.

963 WILL NOT.

Bloody Hell: don't feel like downloading any more to see what gives.

The 'Richmond Dirty Thought Machine' wonders about 2 things:

1. Which was the last LC version to function on 32-bit Mac? [Personally I think it was 7.1.4].

2. Which was the last LC version to produce 32-bit standalones for Mac? [Well, 903 did . . .]

If one wanted to keep "All Those People" who need to produce standalones for 32-bit Macs AND cannot cope with the 'trauma' of using LC 903 or what-have-ye, on their 64-bit Mac . . . then it would be ideal to produce a dephlogisticated version of that last version of LC to produce 32-bit standalones.
-
[attachment=0]Fish.jpg[/attachment]
-
HOWEVER, unlike machines running 32-bit Linux that can STILL be up-to-date, pace Debian 12, and so should not be prey to internet gremlins and so forth, I would NOT use a 32-bit Mac connected to the internet in a public space [i.e. a classroom] . . . I do connect PPC Macs and so on to the internet at home under 'controlled' conditions from time to time ['controlled' as in, it's only me, and I backup before I do that].

I have just noticed [almost inevitably while doing something quite different] that LC 903 could build 32-bit Mac Apps:
-
[attachment=0]FirtyToooo.png[/attachment]
-
Whether 903 could run on a 32-bit Mac or not, I don't know . . . [and at this time of night I am NOT going to dig out my 32-bit polycarb iMac running Snow Leopard to find out] . . .