Discussion:
biber 2.8 binary for x86_64-darwinlegacy
(too old to reply)
s***@re-gister.com
2017-11-22 14:15:39 UTC
Permalink
Hello,I encountered a strange problem with the x86_64-darwinlegacy binaries of TL2017. Using the tlmgr only the biber binary in x86_64-darwin got updated from version 2.7 to 2.8, but not the binary in x86_64-darwinlegacy (stayed at 2.7). This lead to a version mismatch with the simultaneously updated biblatex package. I then completely reinstalled texlive2017 and biber was now completely missing from x86_64-darwinlegacy.Does anyone know if this expected behaviour?My current workaround is a soft link from  x86_64-darwinlegacy to the biber binary from x86_64-darwin, which seems to work fine.Best regards,Sam
Mojca Miklavec
2017-11-22 15:34:29 UTC
Permalink
Karl,

The script for fetching biber should probably be updated to copy the
darwin binary also to darwinlegacy. From what I know they compile on
an old enough system, so having the same binary shouldn't be an issue.
Post by s***@re-gister.com
Hello,
I encountered a strange problem with the x86_64-darwinlegacy binaries of
TL2017.
Using the tlmgr only the biber binary in x86_64-darwin got updated from
version 2.7 to 2.8, but not the binary in x86_64-darwinlegacy (stayed at
2.7). This lead to a version mismatch with the simultaneously updated
biblatex package.
I then completely reinstalled texlive2017 and biber was now completely
missing from x86_64-darwinlegacy.
Does anyone know if this expected behaviour?
No, but this was the first time biber was updated since the switch to
"darwinlegacy" and nobody thought of updating the script that
synchronizes the binaries.

The "problematic" commit was this one:
http://tug.org/svn/texlive?view=revision&sortby=date&revision=45763

Thanks a lot for reporting. The binary for i386-darwin is probably ok
(it's a 32-bit binary in any case).

I hope that Karl will fix this (else I can try to do it myself, but my
fix would probably be one-time hotfix and the problem would then
repeat during the next upgrade again).

Mojca
Karl Berry
2017-11-22 23:09:26 UTC
Permalink
nobody thought of updating the script that
synchronizes the binaries.

Well, "somebody" thought of that :), but "somebody" also had no *legacy
binary to work with, and time to follow up with all possible people was
insufficient :(. For all I knew nobody even used biber/biblatex on
"legacy" mac so it wouldn't matter. Anyway.

The binary for i386-darwin is probably ok

Thanks, copied. Should be updated with tonight's build ... -k
Mojca Miklavec
2017-11-24 07:09:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mojca Miklavec
nobody thought of updating the script that
synchronizes the binaries.
Well, "somebody" thought of that :), but "somebody" also had no *legacy
binary to work with, and time to follow up with all possible people was
insufficient :(. For all I knew nobody even used biber/biblatex on
"legacy" mac so it wouldn't matter. Anyway.
The binary for i386-darwin is probably ok
Thanks, copied. Should be updated with tonight's build ... -k
Thank you, but that was likely a slight misunderstanding. Biber
provides two sets of binaries: i386-darwin and x86_64-darwin. Sure,
i386-darwin works on all three: i386-darwin, x86_64-darwin and
x86_64-darwinlegacy. It makes no sense though to use 32-bit binary
when 64-bit is available.

So it would be slightly better to copy the binary from x86_64-darwin
rather than from i386-darwin.

To repeat what you probably already know: x86_64-darwin and
x86_64-legacydarwin are in theory "the same". The only difference is
that Dick decided to consciously break backwards compatibility (for
both technical and security reasons), so x86_64-darwinlegacy binaries
would work on all 64-bit macs, while Dick's binaries only work on the
latest three OS versions.

The "just latest three releases" rule doesn't hold for biber which is
compiled independently with a "longer backwards compatibility". So
64-bit binary can be used for both x86_64-darwin and
x86_64-darwinlegacy. Now, it can still happen that biber will one day
cease to work for 10.6, but will still work on 10.9. In that case
darwinlegacy users would still benefit from the binary being present
in darwinlegacy.

Mojca
Karl Berry
2017-11-24 23:58:43 UTC
Permalink
So it would be slightly better to copy the binary from x86_64-darwin
rather than from i386-darwin.

Ok, done. I copied i386-darwin because that's what you told me to do :).

To repeat what you probably already know: x86_64-darwin and
x86_64-legacydarwin are in theory "the same".

Well, you compile darwinlegacy binaries on an older Mac than Dick, hence
they are not at all the same, are they? Except that they provide the
same set of programs.

The "just latest three releases" rule doesn't hold for biber which is
compiled independently

Ok, thanks. I know biber is compiled independently, but what system(s) it
is made on, I did not know (and don't need to know :). --best, karl.
Mojca Miklavec
2017-11-25 06:00:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mojca Miklavec
So it would be slightly better to copy the binary from x86_64-darwin
rather than from i386-darwin.
Ok, done.
Thank you,
Mojca

Loading...