5 ms·

Only runs on x64 chips. Presumably only runs macOS binaries built for intel? (i.e. not apple silicon.) I can’t find if it says anywhere.

CuriousTommy 3y ago
I decided to bite the bullet and make an account for this website. > Presumably only runs macOS binaries built for intel? For now, yes. I'm currently trying to get Darling working on ARM64; however, I'm running into issue getting dyld working...
saagarjha 3y ago
Yes, it doesn’t do any emulation.
gwbas1c 3y ago
FWIW: All Macs have been 64-bit for at least 11 years, if not longer. (My MBP from 2012 was 64-bit.) Apple dropped 32-bit support a long time ago. Not sure of the exact date, but sometime around 2015-2017 I had to port a Mac application to 64-bit because the upcoming release of MacOS was going to drop all 32-bit support.
- dave4420 3y ago
  Yeah… I wasn’t really getting at it not working on 32bit, more getting at it not working on arm. If it doesn’t acquire the ability to run arm binaries, it will be a retro computing platform in a couple of years. (And it would have to emulate apple’s cpu extensions, even when running on arm chips, yes.)
  - gwbas1c 3y ago
    Perhaps the assumption is that ARM will be more common on Windows and Linux? Or that ARM will become a requirement at some point in the future? I'm kinda surprised that ARM isn't common yet in Windows and Linux.
    - mgaunard 3y ago
      Why would it be? There isn't really a viable ARM chip for the PC platform. Nvidia is supposedly planning to release one in 2025.
- windowsrookie 3y ago
  The PowerMac G5 and iMac G5 all the way back to 2003 are 64-bit. Apple actually had to drop 64-bit for one year during the intel transition in 2005-2006. (The original Intel Core Duo chips were 32-bit.
  - gwbas1c 3y ago
    That was more than 11 years ago!
- cdogl 3y ago
  FWIW: I suspect when GP said “x64 chips” the reference point was that Apple’s main range of devices in 2023 (Apple Silicon) do not run x64 chips.
  - avarun 3y ago
    Not just their main range but actually none of their current computers do.
- heavyset_go 3y ago
  I think there was like one or two generations max of 32-bit Mac Minis and MacBooks before they shipped with 64-bit Core 2 Duo and Quad processors. I have a 2008 MBP that's 64-bit, and a 2006 Mini that's 32-bit.
- iAMkenough 3y ago
  That's fine if you want to run the software on an 11 year old Mac, but irrelevant to anyone who has purchased a Mac during the Apple Silicon era.
  - account42 3y ago
    Darling is not for running anythig on a Mac but for running OS X software on other computers. That means not supporting Apple-ARM only becomes a problem once software you want to run is no longer available for x86.
- lukevp 3y ago
  x64 means x86-64 in common parlance. Apple silicon would be an arm64 platform in comparison. Lots of software is compiled for both right now, but Apple is abandoning x86-64 so at some point in the future, software will stop being built for that platform (just like ppc before x86).

CuriousTommy 3y ago

I decided to bite the bullet and make an account for this website. > Presumably only runs macOS binaries built for intel? For now, yes. I'm currently trying to get Darling working on ARM64; however, I'm running into issue getting dyld working...

saagarjha 3y ago

Yes, it doesn’t do any emulation.

gwbas1c 3y ago

FWIW: All Macs have been 64-bit for at least 11 years, if not longer. (My MBP from 2012 was 64-bit.) Apple dropped 32-bit support a long time ago. Not sure of the exact date, but sometime around 2015-2017 I had to port a Mac application to 64-bit because the upcoming release of MacOS was going to drop all 32-bit support.

dave4420 3y ago
Yeah… I wasn’t really getting at it not working on 32bit, more getting at it not working on arm. If it doesn’t acquire the ability to run arm binaries, it will be a retro computing platform in a couple of years. (And it would have to emulate apple’s cpu extensions, even when running on arm chips, yes.)
- gwbas1c 3y ago
  Perhaps the assumption is that ARM will be more common on Windows and Linux? Or that ARM will become a requirement at some point in the future? I'm kinda surprised that ARM isn't common yet in Windows and Linux.
  - mgaunard 3y ago
    Why would it be? There isn't really a viable ARM chip for the PC platform. Nvidia is supposedly planning to release one in 2025.
windowsrookie 3y ago
The PowerMac G5 and iMac G5 all the way back to 2003 are 64-bit. Apple actually had to drop 64-bit for one year during the intel transition in 2005-2006. (The original Intel Core Duo chips were 32-bit.
- gwbas1c 3y ago
  That was more than 11 years ago!
cdogl 3y ago
FWIW: I suspect when GP said “x64 chips” the reference point was that Apple’s main range of devices in 2023 (Apple Silicon) do not run x64 chips.
- avarun 3y ago
  Not just their main range but actually none of their current computers do.
heavyset_go 3y ago
I think there was like one or two generations max of 32-bit Mac Minis and MacBooks before they shipped with 64-bit Core 2 Duo and Quad processors. I have a 2008 MBP that's 64-bit, and a 2006 Mini that's 32-bit.
iAMkenough 3y ago
That's fine if you want to run the software on an 11 year old Mac, but irrelevant to anyone who has purchased a Mac during the Apple Silicon era.
- account42 3y ago
  Darling is not for running anythig on a Mac but for running OS X software on other computers. That means not supporting Apple-ARM only becomes a problem once software you want to run is no longer available for x86.
lukevp 3y ago
x64 means x86-64 in common parlance. Apple silicon would be an arm64 platform in comparison. Lots of software is compiled for both right now, but Apple is abandoning x86-64 so at some point in the future, software will stop being built for that platform (just like ppc before x86).