Skip navigation.
 
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility?
FROM : Sam Griffith
DATE : Sun Nov 10 21:56:33 2002

Hello again,

From this link:

file://localhost/Developer/Documentation/Essentials/SystemOverview/Framework
s/index.html

I found this text...

Frameworks solve this problem by bundling a dynamic shared library with the
resources used by the library or otherwise related to it. Indeed, "bundling"
is an apt term because frameworks are bundles as much as applications and
plug-ins are. However, frameworks differ in some significant ways from other
types of bundles:

*    Frameworks include a unique type of resourceheader files. They can
also contain as a resource anything else that is appropriate, such as
private static libraries.
*    The bundle bit is not set when a framework is built. As a result, the
Finder does not treat the framework as a file packagea directory presented
as a fileand thus developers can browse the packaged header files.
*    Frameworks are versioned bundles, which are described in "The Internal
Structure of Frameworks".


So according to the docs, frameworks are like plug-ins.  It is these same
docs that talk about the linking.  I misread them earlier in that I mixed
the linking up with the dynamic loading.

Anyway, the docs imply that frameworks are like plug-ins, so wonder what the
real story is?

Finlay, do you have any more links into the docs that might shed some more
info?

Thanks,

--
Sam Griffith Jr.
email:      <email_removed>
Web site:  http://homepage.mac.com/staypufd/index.html



On 11/10/2002 9:30 AM, "Finlay Dobbie" <<email_removed>> wrote:

> On Sunday, November 10, 2002, at 07:39  am, Rosyna wrote:
>

>> But uhm... frameworks are bundles, aren't they?
>
> Depends what you mean by "bundle", but in the terminology Ondra was
> referring to, no, they're not. Frameworks are just dynamic library
> (.dylib) + headers, whereas bundles are dynamically loadable things,
> like plugins and so on (.so). See the Linker release notes, linker
> manpage, and /usr/include/mach-o/dyld.h for more info :-)
>
> -- Finlay
> _______________________________________________
> cocoa-dev mailing list | <email_removed>
> Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
> http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.

_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | <email_removed>
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.

Related mailsAuthorDate
ml"weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Dan Wood Nov 7, 20:20
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Bill Cheeseman Nov 8, 11:17
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Dan Wood Nov 9, 16:02
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Ondra Cada Nov 9, 16:31
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Marco Scheurer Nov 9, 16:40
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Bill Cheeseman Nov 9, 19:35
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Bill Cheeseman Nov 9, 19:38
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Jonathan Hendry Nov 9, 20:55
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Nicholas Riley Nov 10, 03:17
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Rosyna Nov 10, 05:30
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Sam Griffith Nov 10, 06:56
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Rosyna Nov 10, 08:39
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Bill Cheeseman Nov 10, 11:10
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Finlay Dobbie Nov 10, 13:38
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Finlay Dobbie Nov 10, 16:30
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Piers Uso Walter Nov 10, 18:34
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Ondra Cada Nov 10, 20:21
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Ondra Cada Nov 10, 20:27
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Rosyna Nov 10, 20:47
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Sam Griffith Nov 10, 21:56
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Finlay Dobbie Nov 10, 22:12
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Ondra Cada Nov 10, 22:29
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Bill Cheeseman Nov 10, 23:45
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Ondra Cada Nov 11, 01:11
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Marco Scheurer Nov 11, 11:07
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Bill Cheeseman Nov 11, 12:23
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Ondra Cada Nov 11, 14:52
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Marco Scheurer Nov 11, 17:27
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Ondra Cada Nov 11, 18:11
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Bill Cheeseman Nov 11, 20:51
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Ondra Cada Nov 11, 22:14
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Bill Cheeseman Nov 12, 00:37
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Rosyna Nov 12, 01:40
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Rosyna Nov 12, 01:43
mlRe: "weak link" framework refs for 10.1 compatibility? Rosyna Nov 12, 01:45