Open kyzmitch opened 2 years ago
I don't find this right. Instead, you should not pass --universal
to obtain xcframework.
Alternatively, you can pass --no-framework
to obtain separate builds and then lipo
them separately for device and for simulator. But for that you'd also have to comment out the scrunchAllLibsTogetherInOneLibPerPlatform
call at https://github.com/faithfracture/Apple-Boost-BuildScript/blob/master/boost.sh#L1806
Sorry, I didn't tell that my goal is to have static library only for use in c++ code in iOS app (no need to have Obj-c++ bindings). I'm passing --no-framework
in addition to --universal
and the app produces FAT static libraries with this change.
Could you clarify what did you mean by using lipo
separately. I thought that --universal
option could do this work already.
my goal is to have static library only for use in c++ code in iOS app
you can also pack it in xcframework, it's not limited to objc
Could you clarify what did you mean by using lipo separately
I mean make separate libs for device and simulator: this will allow to have arm64 in both. Something like this: https://github.com/kambala-decapitator/vcmi-ios-depends/blob/main/deps/scripting/luajit.sh#L44-L47
I tend to agree with @kambala-decapitator , a xcframework seems like the "cleanest" output. @kyzmitch is this not an option for you ?
Fix build of FAT binary for iOS platform when there is e.g. arm64 version of static library is present for both iOS device and simulator.