Most of you will know that the underlying core set of components of Mac OS X and the iPhone operating system are released under the Apple Public Source License, an FSF-approved open source license. Few of you, however, will have actually used Darwin in any other form than Mac OS X or the iPhone OS. Despite numerous projects attempting so, Darwin has never gained any significant traction apart from Apple's own interest. The PureDarwin project tries to rise from the ashes of the OpenDarwin project, and has just released a Christmas developer preview.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2008-04-30
Well... If you take GNUstep/etoile you can make a nice MacOSX replacement out of Linux, other BSDs and OpenSolaris too...
What I would like to know is, really, what does Darwin has to offer that other Unix and Unix-like systems don't?... for example, I see on the release page that pureDarwin has ZFS, DTrace and X11 working... so, why not use OpenSolaris or FreeBSD?
Member since:2006-03-26
Exactly. Tons of OS projects jump up like this every day it seems. None of them seem to offer any more than what is already out there. No-one does anything creative with the GUI, or tries to improve that at all. Everyone just seems to be content with: Take a linux/darwin,bsd kernel, slap some existing packages in it to make it usable, slap KDE/Gnome/Enlightenment/or what have you on top of that, then claim you just created an OS.
I would love to see a project like this though that runs off of openstep gui, and uses objective c/gnustep for their main api. I think that would set it apart better. That combined with an appearance overhaul on openstep.
Edited 2008-12-26 13:30 UTC
Member since:2005-11-21
What I would like to know is, really, what does Darwin has to offer that other Unix and Unix-like systems don't?... for example, I see on the release page that pureDarwin has ZFS, DTrace and X11 working... so, why not use OpenSolaris or FreeBSD?
Very true, especially seeing as how this is designed to be Macintosh only.
Everyone knows I'm an advocate of OS X and Macs, but to use this only on a Mac seems a mystery.
Member since:2005-12-13
I must say I agree.
Open Solaris would even be a better way for one to run ZFS anyway.
What I'd like to see though was for some of the core Darwin components like Open Directory and DirectoryServices to be ported to some open source OS like Open Solaris for use as a complete Mac OS X Server replacement along with Mac OS X clients. This would also make the use of Apple's open source CalendarServer much easier, as it ties itself quite tightly towards the Apple Open directory API structure.
The rest of it, Apple might as well keep to itself, if you ask me!
Member since:2008-11-22
Member since:2005-11-11
Cloning an OS such as it remains compatible at the ABI is very difficult, and demanding. Not very exciting for open source developers, for sure. Such a task only makes sense for windows, given its huge user base and applications.
Mac OS X, from an OS POV, has nothing much to offer compared to linux or bsd or other unices. Its internals or architecture are not interesting compared to the other open source alternatives: the interesting bits of Mac OS X are the proprietary ones: quartz, cocoa, the applications, maybe the development tools (instruments and the likes). There is a reason why Apple, given its history of secrecy, has given away the kernel: it is useless for anyone but Apple.
What would something like open darwin have to offer that bsd or linux cannot ?
Member since:
2005-11-10
Great to see this come back together!
Using Open Darwin as a base, and a GNUStep WM would make for a great Mac OS replacement. Étoilé is an interesting project, and PureDarwin just adds a little more diversity to the list of OSes out there; there’s too many Linux derivatives IMO.