https://developer.apple.com/library/content/releasenotes/General/CarbonCoreDeprecations/index.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40012224-CH1-SW16 explicitly suggests sysctl as replacement when targeting 10.8+, which strongly suggests that it'll work.
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Erik Pilkington via Phabricator < revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote: > erik.pilkington added a comment. > > I seem to remember that mapping from kernel versions to marketing versions > was tossed around as a potential alternative to Gestalt. I think that the > problem was Apple sometimes introduces (or reserves the right to introduce) > new SDKs in a patch release (ie, Z in X.Y.Z), which wouldn't necessary > imply a new kernel version, and would still need to be queried by > @available. This makes it impossible to use kernel version in the general > case (Or at least I think, it would be nice if someone internal to Apple > could confirm this?). This rules out using `sysctl()` and the like. > > AFAIK this just leaves `Gestalt()` and Objective-C's `NSProcessInfo`, the > latter would mean pulling in the Objective-C runtime, which would be > unfortunate for C users (using the `__builtin_available` spelling). I don't > think `Gestalt()` is in any danger of actually being removed, so we might > as well use it. The only alternative I know of to those would be manually > parsing the `SystemVersion.plist` XML file, but I think that might cause > problems with sandboxed processes (right?). Any thoughts here would be much > appreciated, `Gestalt()` is by no means a perfect solution. > > Compiler-rt does seem like a good place it put this, should I move the > runtime code there instead? > > Thanks for taking a look! > Erik > > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D27827 > > > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
