Re: [Gimp-print-devel] MacOS 10.6

[Steve L. <sle...@ya...>]

Let me verify I can build a version that installs and runs on 10.6.  If I can, let me build a last build for 10.6.  I can add documentation stating it is the last build to support Snow Leopard.  I will wait for Robert to prepare a release version and build both the fat version and the final 10.6 version.  Agreed?

Steve Letter

> On Feb 2, 2021, at 6:16 PM, Robert Krawitz <rl...@al...> wrote:
> 
> On 2/2/21 3:39 PM, Matt Broughton wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 2, 2021, at 1:23 PM, Steve Letter via Gimp-print-devel
>>> <gim...@li... <mailto:gim...@li...>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> The only easily implemented option to continue support for Snow Leopard is to build a second
>>> version without signing.  I haven't tested this but I think it would work.  Is this something we
>>> really want though?
>>> 
>>> Steve Letter You're never to old to learn something stupid.  -- unknown
>> 
>> Just thinking out loud here.  Would it make more sense to build an unsigned package for Snow Leopard
>> 10.6 through Sierra 10.12?  I'm thinking that may may provide a longer term solution.  We would then
>> have a fat binary with x86_64 and arm64 with a signed package for later versions of macos.
> 
> If I'm reading it correctly, 10.6 is the last release that supported 32-bit platforms.  It looks
> like very few systems were orphaned by 10.7, basically the Core Solo and Core Duo (not Core 2 Duo).
> Other than a couple of Mac mini systems that lived on through August 2007, these were all
> short-lived laptops that were discontinued at various times in 2006, so close to 15 years ago.  It
> looks like a fair number more systems were orphaned by 10.8 (the Core 2 Duo ones, including some Mac
> Pros that might have a longer lifespan), but after that, nothing was orphaned until 10.12, and then
> only a few MacBook Air laptops.  However, 10.13 orphaned a lot of systems.
> 
> I would naively expect that there are more people running 10.12 (say) for whom signed packages are a
> plus than people still running specifically 10.6, but maybe I'm wrong.  With the switch to a new
> minor version, this seems like a convenient point to drop support for 10.6.  But again, I'm not a
> Mac expert so I want to be a bit careful what I say.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gimp-print-devel mailing list
> Gim...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gimp-print-devel