Possibly in fear that hackers will be able to find backdoors in the Intel Darwin version and allow OSX to run on PCs other than Macs, Apple has only posted the sources of Darwin for PPC for the latest version.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-20
Member since:2005-10-31
Member since:
2006-01-03
Member since:2005-07-20
Darwin has been available for PC since Darwin 1.3.1 (Os X 10.0). You can checkt at http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/ if you don't believe me.
Member since:
2006-01-11
Member since:
2006-01-10
There are other versions that are older that work on the Intel. I was confused by the summary as well. So doesn't this in essence mean they changed the license for it? Can they even take the source code for one specific platform and change the license for it? I could understand if they just distribute the source, but no ISOs... bah, like it matters, someone will more than likely hack the full release anyhow to work on random hardware.
Leech
Member since:2006-01-14
Member since:2005-08-10
"The BSD license does allow for the binary distribution of code with only crediting the author."
And agreeing to not sue the author, and that the notice must remain in place in both source and binary form. If you're gonna bash it, at least get it right ;^)
Edited 2006-01-14 08:22
Member since:2006-01-14
Member since:
2005-07-06
Isn't it possible that they're not releasing the source until after the first Intel Macs ship? They always wait until a few days after a release has been available to release the code. Maybe they're not considering the Intel version to be "released" until the Intel Macs hit the streets.
I think a little patience is in order.
Member since:
2005-07-07
Member since:2005-06-28
http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/ Check the parenthesis. It says "for PowerPC". These sources are not for Intel. They don't contain the Intel boot code.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-06-28
Member since:
2005-06-29
Member since:
2005-12-04
Member since:
2006-01-11
Member since:2005-11-09
Member since:2006-01-11
> because an OSS project sponsored by a company is not popular does not mean that it is lip service.
It does amount to lip service - ever heard of people bashing Apple and MacOSX?. No and why not?. Because all Apple has to do is say hey the kernel is open sourced and that basically shuts people up. Now what can real programmers do with Open Darwin - basically squat!.
Member since:2005-11-14
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-09
Nailed that one, 'Open', would appear to be just another buzz word to be bandied about as it suits Apple. It was pretty obvious when I went looking for a quicktime producer for linux or any other os, I recall the only thing open quicktime on linux seemed to be good for was serving up the mov's made on your mac in an expensive closed app. The open source community would be ahead of the game if it just completely ostracized them.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:
2005-07-06
I feel this story is slightly premature. It's not based on a (un)official statement or anything.
In the past there are x86 versions. Their faq - http://developer.apple.com/darwin/projects/darwin/faq.html - says:
Q. I heard that Darwin runs on Intel processor-based PCs. Is that true?
A. Yes, and we're partnering with the Darwin developer community to enhance support for this platform.
Surely we ought to wait-and-see before jumping to conclusions.
Member since:2005-06-28
Member since:
2005-08-10
Member since:
2005-07-07
Member since:
2005-10-25
he sources for Darwin 8.4, which correspond to Mac OS X 10.4.4 (for PowerPC), are available for download. [Jan 10 2006]
Perhaps they made some significant changes recently due to the EFI implementation, etc and the releases are not longer equivalent. At least the wording above makes it appear that way.
Everybody needs to relax. The machines arent even shipping yet.
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:
2005-07-06
I assume the EFI bootloader code was rushed since developer transition kits were BIOS based. So the last minute additions of EFI probably require some sort of internal approval process before opening up. Instead of delaying the 10.4.4 updates in general, they probably decided to just release the current PPC versions as they have in the past.
They cannot keep EFI boot loading out of darwin because that effectively kills the darwin project once PPC machines become obsolete.
Member since:2005-08-12
Member since:
2006-01-09
That FAQ is old. There is a good chance that it's out of date and Apple has taken a different decision since then.
Or, we indeed jumping the gun. Time will tell. Apple won't.
What sentimentalism!!!
Apple will post the update a little later.
That's all.
Mark my words.
No reason not to, unhacability-through-obscurity is bogus.
Member since:
2006-01-11
that's the point... "they, they, they". it's their own work, done with their money, under their licence.
probably they will release it soon, and anyway afaik they don't get that much help from outside apple. if community developers whined, they migth have a point.
not me, so i don't 
Member since:
2005-10-20
I am tired to hear this hype about bla bla bla, we will get OS X on standard PC, bla bla bla...
I'm working with OS X and Apple products every single day, ok? And I can assure you that without Apple support OS X on standard boxes are worthless. And not only that - After three-four months you there will be posts all over the place "my OS X86 leaks memory!", "it is 500lb gorilla!", etc. OS X is _heavy_, period. And their apps leaks memory like a hell. Sure, OS X has nice parts - visual design, functionality is VERY well thought out. But I personally feel that lot of other sides of operational system are left out in the cold. For example, OS X Tiger Server has Server Admin - cool app, first with good way to edit Apache, Postfix, Bind, etc. configuration. However, it eats memory like a desert and can bring CPU of your server to its knees. Yeah, sure, my pick is that they waited for going over to Intel so they can debug and optimize it then on it.
OS X is nice, but it has it's own share of problems. Personally I would pick my Gentoo installation with GNOME over it any day. Still, for artists it is OS for them without any doubt.
post scriptum - Expose will make you to hit F9/F10 regurarly on your another Windows/Linux station, be warned 