Re: CI integration for Octave on OSX

[Bradley Giesbrecht]

On Dec 4, 2014, at 8:06 AM, Ben Abbott <address@hidden> wrote:

>> On Dec 4, 2014, at 10:41 AM, c. <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 
>> On 4 Dec 2014, at 15:12, Ben Abbott <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 
>>> I think it is ok to require Mac OS >= 10.9.
>> 
>> If we require Mac OS >= 10.9 we can as well require Mac OS >= 10.10
>> and save ourselves some headaches.
>> 
>> I think the only bacward compatibility that would make sense is with Snow 
>> Leopard
>> There are users that are stuck with this version because it was the last 
>> version 
>> with rosetta and carbon that also ran on PPC.

Snow Leopard (10.6) will probably be around for a while so if Octave has SL 
users I would at least take a stab at supporting them, until the build systems 
became to dissimilar to make it not worth the extra work.

>> Other than that I think it is OK to expect a vast majority of Mac users to 
>> keep
>> up with the latest free OS X updates as Apple is pushing quite hard towrds 
>> this.
>> 
>> So, IMO, if it is easy to support multiple versions of OSX that is OK, 
>> otherwise 
>> if it saves us some effort we could just stick with the latest version.
> 
> I think it all depends upon the difficulty. For example, Octave is easier to 
> build on 10.9 and the 10.9 version runs on 10.10.
> 
> Running Yosemite, I'm able to build Octave 3.8.2 with no problems using Fink, 
> but have not managed that on Macports. I'm not able to build the gui-release 
> or default branch on Yosemite at all. However, I'm able to build both on 
> Mavericks. Until the difficulties with Yosemite are overcome, I recommend 
> that Mavericks be the target for the app bundle.

I would be surprised if Octave built on Mavericks would not run for at least 
several versions to come.

I would suggest Mavericks for now, mostly because I already have vm images so 
why make more work at this stage :)

--
Brad

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail