Linked by David Adams on Tue 8th Apr 2008 16:33 UTC
BSD and Darwin derivatives "I am very happy about the direction in which the Mac OS X GUI is going, although sadly many Mac users aren't interested in (or don't know about) the "lower levels" of the Macintosh Operating System. Have you ever wondered why the Terminal greets you with the words "Welcome to Darwin"? Why do BSD and Mac OS share certain bits of code? Why does Wikipedia describe Mac OS X as a graphical operating system? Today we're going to take a look at the underlying open source technology which powers your fancy Leopard OS - the hidden core set of components, named Darwin."
Thread beginning with comment 308925
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: What BSD could have been
by Moulinneuf on Thu 10th Apr 2008 02:02 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: What BSD could have been"
Moulinneuf
Member since:
2005-07-06

BSD don't exist its a delusion of mine ... Only someone who is himself extremely delusionnal would say such a thing.

Yet DFBSD, PC-BSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD exist and you name them because you heards there name ... That's BSD and your contradicting yourself. The BSD in there name should be a big enough clue ...

Your inherently and completely wrong.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: What BSD could have been
by Quag7 on Thu 10th Apr 2008 16:40 in reply to "RE[6]: What BSD could have been"
Quag7 Member since:
2005-07-28

Nevali wrote:

"All of the operating systems (which are actively developed) which are considered part of the BSD family are derivatives. None of them are the canonical Berkeley System Distribution, because no such thing is actively maintained."

BSD *no longer exists* (as an actively developed project). Period.

From Wikipedia:

"Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD, sometimes called Berkeley Unix) is the Unix operating system derivative developed and distributed by the Computer Systems Research Group of the University of California, Berkeley, from 1977 to 1995."

His point is that all of the things that use BSD in their name - FreeBSD, NetBSD, etc. are *derived* from or *developed* from the original BSD, which has not been maintained (according to Wikipedia) since 1995.

There is nothing delusional about this point.

Edited 2008-04-10 16:41 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2