[–] IbJacked 12y ago ↗ What about 'em? [–] z_ 12y ago ↗ Space is cheaper than ever. There two "competing" architectures (arm vs. x86). NetBSD has solution the distinct platform compilation problem.What is a compelling argument against having fat binaries everywhere? Especially given tools that can unpack/strip/lipo to the right architecture. [–] soneil 12y ago ↗ NetBSD isn't mentioned in the wiki article at all. You appear to be using wiki to support an argument that you haven't made?A little context could go a long way here.
[–] z_ 12y ago ↗ Space is cheaper than ever. There two "competing" architectures (arm vs. x86). NetBSD has solution the distinct platform compilation problem.What is a compelling argument against having fat binaries everywhere? Especially given tools that can unpack/strip/lipo to the right architecture. [–] soneil 12y ago ↗ NetBSD isn't mentioned in the wiki article at all. You appear to be using wiki to support an argument that you haven't made?A little context could go a long way here.
[–] soneil 12y ago ↗ NetBSD isn't mentioned in the wiki article at all. You appear to be using wiki to support an argument that you haven't made?A little context could go a long way here.
[–] holyjaw 12y ago ↗ So on mobile this link just took me to a Wikipedia page with absolutely zero context. Am I missing something?
4 comments
[ 4.2 ms ] story [ 22.2 ms ] threadWhat is a compelling argument against having fat binaries everywhere? Especially given tools that can unpack/strip/lipo to the right architecture.
A little context could go a long way here.