Vcomponents in Mach-O Package

[Ruslan Zasukhin]

On 12/20/05 8:27 PM, "Dave Addey" <listmail1 at dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

Hi Dave,
 
> Right.  This is going to cause me a major problem.  I really, really wish
> this was stated somewhere, as my past two weeks of work have been wasted if
> I can't include VComponents in a package :-(

You cannot build app as PEF ?
 
>> Macho app compiled by REALbasic do not work with current V4RB,
>>     because it is CARBON,
> 
> ...yes they do!  As long as it can find the Vcomponents, a Mach-O
> application will work fine.  My app works fine on a machine with the
> Vcomponents in CFMSupport.

Yes we all know this fact.
 
> Are you *sure* that there is no way to call in to the runtime libraries from
> a Mach-O compile?

I have spend a whole day -- no way.

Macho app DO NOT search for libs in the MacOS folder, not in MacOSClasses,
not in any other location inside of package.

> I am positive it is possible and easy to do.

I have not find ANY way, and any info how todo this.
Info about MACHO dylibs do not help for CARBON libs.

> For example, when I run my Mach-O application on a development computer here,
> it works absolutely fine with V4RB 2.0.5, as long as the Vcomponents folder is
> in the CFMSupport folder.

Right.

> Why should Mach-O be able to call Valentina from
> CFMSupport, but not able to call it from within its own package?

Ask Apple about this.

I have send this question to 3 apple list. Silent in response.

> It would still be using the same files.  It is simply a case of asking it to
> look in the right place to find them.

Right, just it NOT WANT find them.


>> What AppBundler cannot do for you ??
> 
> AppBundler will not bundle a REALbasic mach-o file, as it is already
> bundled.

Not clear. It can make you bundle which works perfectly.
 

>> V4RB do not and cannot search in executable_path, because it is CARBON.
> 
> Drat.  Any idea when this might be possible in V4RB for Mach-O?  Sorry to
> ask, but I'll have to revert back to Valentina 1 if it's going to be a
> while.  Which would be very annoying :-(
 
> Guess I should have checked this first before upgrading to Valentina v2.
> But because v1.9 worked fine for Mach-O builds, I kind of assumed that v2
> would too.

Well, this is not hard. We have macho engine and products already.

Just I do not see any strong reason why you cannot go by PEF way.


-- 
Best regards,

Ruslan Zasukhin
VP Engineering and New Technology
Paradigma Software, Inc

Valentina - Joining Worlds of Information
http://www.paradigmasoft.com

[I feel the need: the need for speed]