On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 11:33, Andreas Harder wrote:

Hi all!

If I update the minimals via first-setup.sh I get the 32bit-binaries (luatex) although I'm on Snow Leopard. If I change the binaries myself it works fine and the compilation is notable faster!

We had a lengthy discussion about Snow Leopard. The last message was Yue Wang's proposal to check for 64-bit compatibility:

The hardware test: Yue:context yue$ if test `sysctl -n hw.cpu64bit_capable | grep -c 1` = 1 ; then echo yes; else echo no; fi yes

The software test: Yue:context yue$ if test `uname -r|cut -f1 -d"."` -ge 10 ; then echo yes; else echo no; fi yes

This test needs to be fixed in: - first-setup.sh - setuptex - mtxrun.lua The biggest problem is the latest one. I'm not sure if Hans is willing to implement that in MKIV and I'm still not decided if I want to mess with that ugly code or not. The reason for the change: - a bit faster and a bit more puristic The reason against the change: - a bit ugly - the 32-bit binaries work - one can always boot in 64-bit mode There's always a third option to provide fat binaries, but as others would probably confirm: they are a bit fat indeed. Three times the original size since we now support 3 platforms. Any other votes? Mojca

Hans Hagen wrote:

Mojca Miklavec wrote:

...

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 11:33, Andreas Harder wrote:

...

Hi all!

If I update the minimals via first-setup.sh I get the 32bit-binaries (luatex) although I'm on Snow Leopard. If I change the binaries myself it works fine and the compilation is notable faster!

We had a lengthy discussion about Snow Leopard. The last message was Yue Wang's proposal to check for 64-bit compatibility:

...

The hardware test: Yue:context yue$ if test `sysctl -n hw.cpu64bit_capable | grep -c 1` = 1 ; then echo yes; else echo no; fi yes

The software test: Yue:context yue$ if test `uname -r|cut -f1 -d"."` -ge 10 ; then echo yes; else echo no; fi yes

hm, we need to use the methods built in luatex

Someone should check what is returned in the os.uname() return table. Best wishes, Taco

Mojca Miklavec wrote:

...

...

...

...

The software test: Yue:context yue$ if test `uname -r|cut -f1 -d"."` -ge 10 ; then echo yes; else echo no; fi yes hm, we need to use the methods built in luatex Someone should check what is returned in the os.uname() return table.

Mine returns

t={ ["machine"]="x86_64", ["nodename"]="...[my ip]...", ["release"]="10.0.0", ["sysname"]="Darwin", ["version"]="Darwin Kernel Version 10.0.0: Fri Jul 31 22:46:25 PDT 2009; root:xnu-1456.1.25~1/RELEASE_X86_64", }

but I'm booting in 64-bit mode (I need to reboot first to check for return value in 32-bit mode).

On one hand uname doesn't return anything usable when booting with 32-bit kernel, but on the other hand one probably already runs the 64-bit luatex at the time when mtxrun needs to determine the architecture.

Well, I doubt you can discover whether you have a totally 32bit software environment with a 64bit kernel without lots of trickery (but I could be wrong about that). In any case, os.uname() will give the same results as the shell command uname. 64bit osx runs 32bit executables (I assume) so you could make the initial luatex (the one used during install) be a 32bit one, then make that one decide on which one to use for normal typesetting? Best wishes, Taco

OK, I did a nasty thing. I have patched "setuptex" to run 64-bit binaries on Snow Leopard. There is only one problem: mtxrun doesn't know that one is running on a 64-bit platform and consequently fetches just 32-bit binaries. Consequently one needs to call mtx-update with "--platform=osx-64". I fixed first-setup.sh, but existing Snow Leopard users with 32-bit kernels will have to add that to first-setup.sh themselves ... or we need to revert the change. Hans, Taco - does LuaTeX itself know if it's 64-bit or not? Mojca

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 07:59, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

Mojca Miklavec wrote:

...

Hans, Taco - does LuaTeX itself know if it's 64-bit or not?

Only internally at the moment, but I could add a variable in the os library (after I figure out which of the sizeof()'s is the best one to use).

When outside the binary one can run "file" for example:

file osx-intel/current/luatex/beta-0.45.0/luatex osx-intel/current/luatex/beta-0.45.0/luatex: Mach-O executable i386

file osx-ppc/current/luatex/beta-0.45.0/luatex osx-ppc/current/luatex/beta-0.45.0/luatex: Mach-O executable ppc

file osx-64/current/luatex/beta-0.45.0/luatex osx-64/current/luatex/beta-0.45.0/luatex: Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64

file linux/current/luatex/beta-0.44.0/luatex linux/current/luatex/beta-0.44.0/luatex: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.2.5, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped

file linux-64/current/luatex/beta-0.44.0/luatex linux-64/current/luatex/beta-0.44.0/luatex: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.6.4, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped

But I have no idea if there is some simple way to hardcode the target architecture into LuaTeX itself. (Apart from compiling "hello world", running "file" on it, doing a platform-dependent regular expression and passing that value to luatex at compile time. But that would be really really ugly.) gcc could be as kind as returning the architecture on request. Yes, I know, I should be dreaming at night, not in the middle of day. Mojca

2009/11/19 Taco Hoekwater :

...

Hans, Taco - does LuaTeX itself know if it's 64-bit or not?

Only internally at the moment, but I could add a variable in the os library (after I figure out which of the sizeof()'s is the best one to use).

How about exposing uname(2)? Or is that too much information? Best Martin