[CMake] No Native 64-Bit CMake Binaries?

[Richard Wackerbarth]

Yes, it works for now. However, the 64-bit version for MacOSX 10.6 is currently "broken" (at least to the extent that some of the tests don't "work out of the box" without specific configuration). I think that it is important that the community have as much experience as possible with the "new" implementation BEFORE the "old" one stops working entirely. We should encourage 64-bit capable users to use 64-bit implementations.

I'm happy to build my own from source. But it appears that some others are unwilling to do so.
Perhaps you should post notice to the effect that those who want a 64-bit version should build it from source.
I'm sure that the OS distributors that provide CMake all do that already. They don't rely on YOUR binaries when the source is available.

Richard

On May 6, 2010, at 8:18 AM, Bill Hoffman wrote:

> On 5/6/2010 9:13 AM, Richard Wackerbarth wrote:
>> Bill,
>> 
>> As for the need of 64-bit binaries, I agree that it is not a performance issue.
>> However, it will be a compatibility issue. Things evolve. Remember
>> MacOSX 10.0, 10.1? Back then, you could have argued that we didn't need
>> a new version of CMake. The binaries from MacOS 9 ran just fine. Now,
>> not only can you not run those binaries, but you cannot even run an
>> MacOSX 10.5(ppc) program on 10.6. Even though that worked just fine on
>> 10.5(Intel), it is no longer supported.
>> Similarly, libraries get updated and, in the process, drop
>> compatibility with "ancient" configurations. Since the hardware is
>> clearly moving toward 64-bit, I don't expect it to be too long before we
>> start seeing 32-bit compatibility "rotting".
> 
> Sure, and the version (of OS X) where that happens, is when I would start shipping 64 bit.   Right now having one binary seems cleaner, however, I most likely should put some notes on the download page explaining that 32 bit CMake's can be used to build 64 bit applications with no problem.
> 
> -Bill