-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
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
Allow ARM on macOS #373
Allow ARM on macOS #373
Conversation
Around line 425, there is:
I think the |
Running this version on Apple Silicon currently fails because we're not giving
|
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.
Looks good so far!
Yes, that could reference |
Co-authored-by: Mike McQuaid <mike@mikemcquaid.com>
I've tested on ARM and Intel macOS. I'd like to have some Linux testing, but otherwise I think this is complete and ready for review. |
I gave it a quick test on Linux in |
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.
Looks good to me! Let's hold off merging until we're able to announce we "support" this (i.e. we have a non-trivial number of bottles).
I think this is great, as really a shockingly large amount of stuff "just works" now - it's really impressive how fast that has happened. But I wonder if you might want to consider describing it as more partial support, or support with significant caveats? As some not-insignificant proportion of formulae will likely not be compatible for a long time, if ever. So setting user expectations in some form may help? |
Yup, that's the plan before we'd merge this 👍🏻 |
We have passed 1000 ARM bottles, and I would like to merge this and enable ARM testing on CI: Homebrew/homebrew-core#67577 |
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.
Can we print some sort of disclaimer that there's still a lot of packages missing bottles and recommend Rosetta 2 for now? What's the state of brew doctor
on a default ARM setup; might want to address/add to that too?
Re. |
👍🏻 to merge once that's merged. |
@MikeMcQuaid I believe we need a version shipped, otherwise people will get brew doctor complaints |
I've opened a brew issue tracking Apple Silicon support, and stating our current level of support, here: Homebrew/brew#10152 |
There's a new |
Just a quick note: since this PR got merged, I think it would be good to update the first lines of the instructions on https://docs.brew.sh/Installation (they only mention |
@fievelk indeed, thank you for noticing! Homebrew/brew#10182 |
@fievelk @fxcoudert it also says that a 64-bit Intel CPU is required 😉 |
@charliegroll my pull request also changes that part: Homebrew/brew#10182 |
@fxcoudert Why does the |
@fxcoudert That issue does not really talk about why. I guess the closest answer is Homebrew/brew#9130 (comment) But as lenlo mentions:
But yet, that does not explain why they prefixes has to be different. |
Basically because not everything supports Apple Silicon, we need to have coexisting installations for Rosetta and native. Hence we cannot use |
@fxcoudert but couldn't hat just be a subdir in the prefix? |
A subdirectory like |
Off-topic, but I prefer |
Homebrew on Linux uses |
Although we're not entirely there yet, the time for Apple Silicon support is nearing. I've had a look at the installer script to see what is needed there.