[Webscreamer]

We all know Leopard is going to be optimized for 64bit, and no doubt for the Xeons. But, will they be making this available for the G5s too?

I'd love to install 10.5 Server eventually on G5 Powermacs and have the ability to use the 64bit MySQL and such.

[TETENAL]

Isn't MySQL 64-bit in Tiger already? I thought this is a Unix-tool.

[Webscreamer]

I don't think they have the 64 bit installed..(Don't quote me)

I was using that as an example. I just wanna see a PowerMac G5 run 64 bit apps on Leopard.

[CatOne]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Isn't MySQL 64-bit in Tiger already? I thought this is a Unix-tool.

Correct.

Well actually, I don't know for sure that the version of MySQL that ships with Tiger Server is 64 bit. It's likely it is not.

However, there is a 64-bit build of MySQL out there (it's built with separate flags). I know of people who are running web sites using the 64-bit build of MySQL on OS X Server. So it's possible.

It's likely the one that ships with Leopard will be built as 64 bit by default.

[CatOne]

Originally Posted by Webscreamer

We all know Leopard is going to be optimized for 64bit, and no doubt for the Xeons. But, will they be making this available for the G5s too?

I'd love to install 10.5 Server eventually on G5 Powermacs and have the ability to use the 64bit MySQL and such.

I'd say... 99.446% likely.

[imitchellg5]

The G5 is a 64 bit chip, so it should work.

[Detrius]

Originally Posted by Webscreamer

We all know Leopard is going to be optimized for 64bit, and no doubt for the Xeons. But, will they be making this available for the G5s too?

I'd love to install 10.5 Server eventually on G5 Powermacs and have the ability to use the 64bit MySQL and such.

I would say 100% probability. The compiler ALREADY supports 64-bit PowerPC chips. The issue of whether or not 10.4 is 64-bit native happens above the compiler level. If they coded everything to support 64-bit, it wouldn't matter much whether it was compiled for PowerPC or IA-64.

Besides, if the G5 wasn't fully supported as a 64-bit processor, not only would Apple be *really* pissing off G5 customers, but you'd have false advertising issues if it hadn't already been stated.

The G5 will be supported as a 64-bit processor. You have nothing to worry about.

[Big Mac]

Enhanced 64-bit Support

Leopard delivers 64-bit power in one, universal OS. Now Cocoa and Carbon application frameworks, as well as graphics, scripting, and the rest of the system are all 64-bit. Leopard delivers 64-bit power to both Intel- and PowerPC-based Macs, so you don’t have to install separate applications for different machines. There’s only one version of Mac OS X, so you don’t need to maintain separate operating systems for different uses.

[badtz]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Enhanced 64-bit Support
Leopard delivers 64-bit power to both Intel- and PowerPC-based Macs, so you don’t have to install separate applications for different machines.

thanks for the clip!

[Webscreamer]

Hmmm Maybe we're all wrong.

Xcode 2.4 was released today from Apple with 64 bit support.
"The tools now support development of 64-bit Mach-O binaries for Intel with the -arch x86_64 flag."

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Webscreamer

Hmmm Maybe we're all wrong.

Xcode 2.4 was released today from Apple with 64 bit support.
"The tools now support development of 64-bit Mach-O binaries for Intel with the -arch x86_64 flag."

Xcode already supported 64-bit, just not on Intel Macs (cuz there were no retail 64-bit Intel Macs until yesterday).

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Webscreamer

Hmmm Maybe we're all wrong.

Xcode 2.4 was released today from Apple with 64 bit support.
"The tools now support development of 64-bit Mach-O binaries for Intel with the -arch x86_64 flag."

So? Are you insinuating that due to the fact that there is note of a specific flag for x86_64 compiling, that could mean that 970 64-bit support has been dropped?

[Webscreamer]

Sorry, I didn't know Xcode had 970 64bit support already.

[danengel]

How does a 64-bit application run on a G4?

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by danengel

How does a 64-bit application run on a G4?

It doesn't.

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by danengel

How does a 64-bit application run on a G4?

It won't, unless a 32 bit version is also part of the package.

[King Bob On The Cob]

They updated the frameworks themselves to 64 bit, so hopefully we'll be able to have an 16 exobyte NSString. Sweet.

[Detrius]

Originally Posted by Webscreamer

Sorry, I didn't know Xcode had 970 64bit support already.

It does. It's part of the universal binary thing. This is the detail that doesn't get mentioned. As of Xcode 2.4, we can make a universal binary for four architectures:

ppc, ppc64, x86, x86_64

I think those are the right keywords. It's all in the gcc man pages.

[Mithras]

Originally Posted by King Bob On The Cob

They updated the frameworks themselves to 64 bit, so hopefully we'll be able to have an 16 exobyte NSString. Sweet.

Quoted for truth. This is what was holding back 64-bit goodness -- while you could compile a 64-bit tool, the GUI frameworks weren't 64-bit clean yet.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by danengel

How does a 64-bit application run on a G4?

If the app is specifically written and compiled to require 64-bit computing, then it won't run on a G4 at all (even if it could, it would run at worse than half speed). The good news, however is that most apps don't have to be written and compiled to require 64-bit computing just to take advantage of it.

Even most of the system frameworks don't have to be compiled to require 64-bit computing just to take advantage of it. Depending on how they did this, it might even be that only the lowest-level frameworks, such as CoreFoundation, would require it, though I suspect that OpenGL and Quartz 2D Extreme probably also do. Anyway, for whatever frameworks need 64-bit-specific code, Apple maintains two versions: a 32-bit version and a 64-bit version. Whichever version is appropriate for your machine will be installed when you install the system.

After that, it's all a matter of using these frameworks correctly. Any app that uses these low-level frameworks will then automatically be able to take advantage of 64-bit computing, as long as the app doesn't try to delve too deeply into the inner workings of those frameworks. The same is true for system components that use the low-level frameworks. That's the beauty, and the point, of using frameworks: as long as the framework does what the documentation says it will do, how it does it shouldn't matter. You can rip out the guts of the framework and completely rewrite them, and as long as the new code still does what the documentation says it will do (i.e. the new code isn't buggy and you haven't changed the documentation), everything which uses the framework should still work.

As it stands, most apps should be fine. Some will require updates -namely, those which depended on the frameworks doing things which the documentation never promised- but most shouldn't.

[TETENAL]

That's not correct. 32 bit apps use the 32 bit version of the frameworks and 64 bit apps use the 64 bit version. There is no mixed-mode.