Build a binary for Apple Silicon

[saran-t]

MacOS binary releases should also be available for Apple Silicon machines.

[matte-esse]

I don't want to open another duplicate but I do want to add another request for Apple Silicon binaries, please! Is there an ETA for this issue?

[saran-t]

We have a working (and performant) universal binary build for macOS and have repackaged our macOS release into a proper Framework Bundle, meaning that people will be able to use it more easily in Xcode projects (including Swift ones).

We are now working through our internal release process and intend to make the new build available within the next few weeks.

[bermanboris]

Thanks a lot!

[wookayin]

Excited to hear the great news of the 2.1.1 release! Given that MuJoCo is provided as a framework bundle, which is different from what we used to have before (i.e. ~/.mujoco/mujoco210), would you please provide installation instructions for end users so that one can use other mujoco bindings such as mujoco-py?

UPDATE: The file layout has changed a lot, so any downstream bindings would need a significant update (even for linux x86_64). However, it will be good to provide a canonical, official way of installing the distribution (for example, moving MuJoCo.framework into PYTHON_BASE/lib or putting MuJuCo.app into either /Applications or something like ~/.mujoco/mujoco211). It seems that all the other dependencies just need to be aware of the layout and such changes.

[saran-t]

This issue is about mujoco-py, which isn't a project that we own or maintain. Having said that, since MuJoCo 2.1.1 doesn't change any public API compared to 2.1.0 we expect existing bindings to continue to work modulo changes in file names and location.

For dm_control, we will very shortly be pushing a small change that fixes the load path for MuJoCo and provide updated installation instructions. For mujoco-py, if the maintainers would like to update their code we'd be more than happy to work with them on it. In the meantime, I suggest that you mount the DMG for 2.1.1 then try the following:

mkdir -p ~/.mujoco/mujoco210/bin
cp /Volumes/MuJoCo/MuJoCo.framework/Versions/Current/libmujoco.2.1.1.dylib ~/.mujoco/mujoco210/bin/libmujoco210.dylib
cp -r /Volumes/MuJoCo/MuJoCo.framework/Versions/Current/Headers ~/.mujoco/mujoco210/include

Let us know if you get anywhere with this!

[wookayin]

@saran-t Yes I know my question is a bit off-topic. However, I think it's still worth considering having a canonical/standard installation path so that downstream applications can detect the lib properly, and in regard to that my point is mainly about installation process and relevant documentation.

Do you expect users to use MuJoCo where the image is being mounted (which is not permanent)? Why don't we have MuJoCo.framework installed somewhere into the system? We could consider providing an installer, but I think simply letting MuJoCo.app installed to /Applications would be an easier solution (if the volume provides a conventional drag-drop instruction..).