Max 4.6 won't build UB VSTs on OS 10.3.9


    Nov 21 2006 | 8:37 pm
    I have the latest Max 4.6.2 installed on two systems. One, a G4 tower running OS 10.3.9, the other, a Pismo laptop running 10.4.8 (if you don't know these models, both are PPC machines).
    My test patch is the most simple plug-in: a plugin~ wired to a plugout~, with a plugconfig object in there too. That's it.
    Building a VST plug-in on the 10.4.8 system creates a Universal plug-in. Building the same plug-in on the 10.3.9 system creates a PowerPC plug-in.
    ** Does anyone know why? **
    If it matters, the "libraries for older external objects" are not installed on either system. Also, if it matters, I do have Max 4.5.6 installed on the 10.3.9 system, but that should have no effect, yes?
    I know there's a lot of confusion about different Max versions and Intel vs PPC processors right now, but I didn't think there was a difference between 10.3 and 10.4 systems as well (once you meet the minimum requirement of 10.3.9, for using Max 4.6).
    Thanks,
    Leigh

    • Nov 21 2006 | 10:45 pm
      Hi Leigh,
      Maybe youve some older Libs. on your 10.3.9
      Look in your CFMSupportFolder // Dev/Library.
      On the other Hand 10.4.x has a different structure.//File Sys etc..
      I think its a good Idea to Perform on 10.4.x because this OS its
      much more stable then 10.3.9.
      greetz
      am
    • Nov 22 2006 | 6:42 pm
      On the 10.3.9 system, I'm still running Max 4.5.6 also, so I need to keep its support files (in /Library/Application Support/Cycling '74 and /Library/CFMSupport) in place.
      With Max 4.6, it's supposed to be self-contained within the application folder, right?
      Leigh
      Quote: am.syn wrote on Tue, 21 November 2006 15:45
      ----------------------------------------------------
      > Hi Leigh,
      > Maybe youve some older Libs. on your 10.3.9
      > Look in your CFMSupportFolder // Dev/Library.
      > On the other Hand 10.4.x has a different structure.//File Sys etc..
      > I think its a good Idea to Perform on 10.4.x because this OS its
      > much more stable then 10.3.9.
      > greetz
      > am
      ----------------------------------------------------
    • Nov 22 2006 | 8:36 pm
      Scratch all this - I think the problem is explained by the phenomenon (whether a bug or intentional, I'm not clear yet) that I reported here: