Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'Universal Binaries' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Universal Binaries
Authored by: ktohg on Aug 17, '05 10:49:17AM

This is great for the one time one code model of a system that is not scalable. In other words once your strip the binary it will no longer be universal and hence no longer scalable you will be lock into that architecture and if you upgrade you better hope they have the same chipset.

It kinda the opposite of what Apple it attempting to do with universal binaries. So keep that in mind and make backups. (Then again with the price of hard drive space these days a (guessing) 30% increase isn't too bad.)

Use wisely.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Not scaleable?
Authored by: veloso on Aug 17, '05 04:14:47PM

Stripping x86 code is like stripping languages you don't use (via monolingual).

First, "scaleable" isn't the right word.

Second, the chances that you -aren't- going to reinstall everything when you get that brand-spanking-new osx86 box are low to nonexistent.

Third, why not? 30% may not seem much, but when you've got a 40 or 80 gig drive every little bit helps. Heck, running monolingual removed tens of megabytes of useless junk (uh, language support) from my system.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Universal Binaries
Authored by: smkolins on Aug 19, '05 09:39:12AM

Of course use wisely, but what is not very scalable is bin bloat as one must destribute installations across hundreds or thousands of computers - our images are often approaching 12 GB as is and adding i386 bloat could significantly expand images, and slow down distribution.

I wish Delocalizer would add a de-archer option.

---
= - - -- - - - =
Steven
smkolins@mac.com
http://homepage.mac.com/smkolins
Possess a pure, kindly, and radiant heart!



[ Reply to This | # ]