-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 45
Remove hard coded arch from macos build #167
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
lpinca
merged 1 commit into
websockets:master
from
mayfield:fix-macos-multi-arch__less-is-more-version
Dec 10, 2025
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These are needed for prebuilt binaries to support both Intel and Apple Silicon when building on Intel. Without these the binary will only work on the platform where it is built.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is that being achieved? On my arm64 mac it just adds the -arch arm64 flag twice. Also I was under the impression a dual arch exec requires two passes of cc with each arch specifier and then you combine them with lipo.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, see
See also 3af3375.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't see how that can be true on an arm mac. See the transcript below from a clean master build. It just adds
-arch arm64twice. The entire reason for my issue/pr in the first place is that the current binding.gyp isn't compatible with electron-builder which requires that each node-gyp output is a single arch. This is gracefully handled by all my other native requirements such as better-sqlite3.If you are still unconvinced that the binding.gyp in bufferutil has issues, then I don't know how else to communicate this issue and you should close this.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is not on arm mac, it was never wanted. It was designed to build a universal binary on mac Intel and an arm only on mac arm. It works as intended.
Yes, which is basically a noop.
Is there a reason for rebuilding? Is it not possible to use the prebuilt universal binary? We can move forward with this PR but you also need to update the CI configuration in order to produce two prebuilt binaries: one for Intel and one for ARM.