Home > BSD & Darwin > GNU-Darwin 1.0 ReleasedGNU-Darwin 1.0 Released Eugenia Loli 2003-01-19 BSD & Darwin 49 CommentsThe GNU-Darwin project is now considered stable and it has reached 1.0 status (it seems that the latest beta will be marked as 1.0). Download from here, packages, ports.About The Author Eugenia LoliEx-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 49 Comments 2003-01-19 1:46 am why must everything be GNU-ized? why can’t these people leave Darwin alone? Why can’t the debian people leave the BSDs alone? They just infect everything with GPL 2003-01-19 1:55 am Why can’t trolls just keep to themselves? 2003-01-19 1:57 am Gnu-darwin is not 100% GPL. More explanation in the discussion here: http://www.advogato.org/article/612.html 2003-01-19 2:01 am Don’t use it. It realls is that easy.Freedom to chose. For you. For them.Good thing. 2003-01-19 2:02 am Not all of it Gnu-ized (great verb!). parts of it are covered by Apple’s APSL, which is BSD like. 2003-01-19 2:07 am Linux is junk. I can’t play pool on yahoo with Linux! 2003-01-19 2:22 am The GNU-Darwin project comes off rather hypocritical. Their project page contains a great deal of anti-Apple diatribe:“Apple continues the wall-of-silence with respect to their repugnant DMCA-based legal action, and there is no reason whatsoever for us to think that they will not undertake similar action in the future. It is regrettable that the DMCA was Apple-sponsored legislation, and it is now time for them to disavow it and promise never to employ it.Second, APSL is languishing, and it is unacceptable to the free software community. It is now time for an APSL revision, which brings the license in line with the free software definition in accordance with the expectations of GNU Project.I think their attitude is along the lines of “Apple, we don’t really like you but we’ll use your software anyway.” 2003-01-19 2:24 am Don’t use Linux then! Use *BSD, Darwin, OSX, XP, OS2 etc… but the main point is;DONT TROLL!!!!!!!.DONT TROLL!!!!!!!.DONT TROLL!!!!!!!.DONT TROLL!!!!!!!.DONT TROLL!!!!!!!.DONT TROLL!!!!!!!.DONT TROLL!!!!!!!.DONT TROLL!!!!!!!.DONT TROLL!!!!!!!.DONT TROLL!!!!!!!. 2003-01-19 2:26 am To all: next comment that is trolling or repeating itself will be moded down. Please talk nicely and calmly. 2003-01-19 2:27 am BTW, I can play pool just fine on linux in both mozilla and yahoo. All you have to do is install Sun’s java jre 1.4 for linux. 2003-01-19 2:42 am What’s the point of having free darwin if there is no free quartz? 2003-01-19 2:45 am You can’t play pool on yahoo? Have you notified the press? Pool on Yahoo is the life blood of the computing industry. Any OS that fails that test is doomed, doomed I say!! Ok, here’s what we’ll do (don’t worry, I’m here to help): you format your drive and get yourself a functional OS on there (and a cup of hot cocoa while you’re at it, you’ve had a hard day) and I’ll notify the trade press that Linux is incapable of pool on Yahoo. I was afraid that the commies were winning but thanks to you, we’ve found the silver bullet to pierce their Red armor! THANK YOU JEFFERFY! YOU’VE SAVED CAPITALISM!PS- Way to go Darwin team (sorry, i’m a little cranky). 2003-01-19 3:37 am What’s the point on using OSX is there’s free Quartz and free Acqua on Linux? 2003-01-19 3:57 am I guess they figure everyone that ends up ont he website already knows what GNU-Darwin is, cuz they sure don’t go out of their way to make an ‘About’ page easy to find.My guess is that this is some kind of *nix-based OS (as if we really needed another one) that runs on x86. 2003-01-19 7:08 am > Linux is junk. I can’t play pool on yahoo with Linux!Heh… yes you can Jeffery. I tried it myself. The JAVA APPLET works perfectly. 2003-01-19 8:45 am > Don’t use it. It realls is that easy.> Freedom to chose. For you. For them.Don’t forget, also freedom to inform others.>Good thing. 2003-01-19 8:46 am Darwin is the BSD layer of Apple’s Mac OS X UNIX based operating system. Darwin is available for both PowerPC and x86 architectures.GNU Darwin is a distribitution which includes Apple’s Darwin distribution (which you can download direct from Apple in the form of ISO images).I think that GNU Darwin includes some addition software as well as a broader set of drivers for better hardware support than Apple’s core distribution.It’s actually a pretty fun OS to play with if you’re a OS enthusiast. The NetInfo database structure for user, privileges, etc. management is kind of confusing at first, but once you get the hang of it, it’s really very flexible and powerful. It’s really something I wish more UNIX and UNIX-like OS’s would adopt as an option if not a standard. Darwin also makes a good platform to run a Quicktime Streaming Server from for free.-Nathan 2003-01-19 10:35 am The NetInfo database structure for user, privileges, etc. management is kind of confusing at first, but once you get the hang of it, it’s really very flexible and powerful. I kind of think NetInfo isn’t that good. (I’m using MacOSX). Well particualary, it doesn’t shadow the passwords. And it uses a pretty old one-way-hashing, which limits the passwords to 8 characters. (and which is pretty fast to generate, so a dictionary attack could happen relatively fast) 2003-01-19 12:12 pm > What’s the point on using OSX is there’s free Quartz and> free Acqua on Linux?Uh?! Zealot to the maximum degree, aren’t you? Where are these free Quartz and Aqua”? 2003-01-19 12:44 pm You may read and post too fast. Looking to the post it was answering, the post you’re quoting has more that sense:What would be the point of using OS X if there was a free Quartz and a free Aqua on Linux.Which is a very interesting question.Ernesto will correct me if I’m wrong. 2003-01-19 1:42 pm I try to install darwin, in a pentium (400 MHZ) but stops at:PCI ver=2.10 BusCount=2 Features=[ BIOS16 CM1 ]Still waiting for root deviceStill waiting for root deviceStill waiting for root device…what’s mean this? 2003-01-19 1:55 pm Before that appear in XML:Waiting on <dict ID=”0″><key>IOProviderClass</key><string ID=”1″>IOMedia</string><key>Content</key><stri ng ID=”2″>CD_ROM_Mode_1</string></dict>dlil_input_thread 82e866c 2003-01-19 3:33 pm I would like to learn OS X but cannot afford a mac just yet. If I set up GNU Darwin on my PC to learn the internals would the system be similar to OS X but without the Quartz GUI? Are the driver API’s the same as X? 2003-01-19 3:58 pm The driver APIs are exactly the same. Without Quartz, you can’t porgram using the higher APIs but low level stuff as such as drivers can be made just fine. As a bonus, you make them cross platform! 2003-01-19 4:32 pm Well.. pool on yahoo.. unfortunately.. isn’t the “reason” for an operating system to succeed or fail.. therefore.. nobody needs to hear your whines. 2003-01-19 4:34 pm There used to be a list of supported hardware but I can’t seem to find that anymore, is it just me or is that page completely removed? 2003-01-19 5:52 pm As it’s says one reply above you should have to read the posts because you misunderstood it completely.Apple may keep something innovative to attract potential customers from the UNIX world. So they have Quartz and Acqua, and now they provide X11 which is a good movement (specially due to the Fink guys) so they have the only “one boot” system that can run let’s say Gimp and Photoshop in an cool environment with a good response. If this was available in Linux for free why should someone switch to a proprietary hardware company? That would make Apple a Software company doing another unix distro. 2003-01-19 6:13 pm If this was available in Linux for free why should someone switch to a proprietary hardware company?But it’s not. So I fail to see the point of even the hypothetical question. I’ve yet to see a single purely open source platform that offers any degree of “cohesiveness” that Apple can offer. Every thing is integrated and interconnected, it’s more that just a pretty front end. I’ve yet to see this done on any kind of wide scale elsewhere aside from inside Windows. 2003-01-19 7:04 pm You probably need to compile with the ‘yahoo pool driver’ statically. 2003-01-19 7:42 pm GNU Darwin is junk, the guy is a stallmanite and it has infected the rest of the project. He has more ” Free Dmitry and Elcomsoft” crap on his site, he says he participated in the Adobe Boycott like anyone cares and like the Boycott really hurt Adobe. The DMCA is there to protect the people from guys like himself and Richard Stallman so that they will not steal intellectual property. He has more Apple flames than I care to talk about on his site. The guy cant play nice well Im not going to use his junk. I will stick with OpenDarwin, which is more helpful in the ways of support then the GNU Darwin project is. I used to think very highly of that guy until the GPL preaching came into play. I have talked to many open source enthusiasts who have read the APSL line to line who say there is nothing wrong with it. The license is basically the BSD License. The GPL is like a virus it will take good software like Linux and make it unusable for commercial use. No companies program for Linux because that means they will have to open up some parts of intellectual property where the BSD License does not require it. Sorry Dr. Micheal Love you can keep the OS. 2003-01-19 8:03 pm “The DMCA is there to protect the people from guys like himself and Richard Stallman so that they will not steal intellectual property.”This is the funniest interpretation I ever saw.Btw, Richard Stallman has been there years before the DMCA, and never has been even accused of stealing IP, or P for that matter.You’re going a little too far, don’t you? 2003-01-19 8:33 pm No I do not think so. They would do it. Stallman and Love are totally aginst the DMCA, what has the DMCA done to them ? I am glad it is there, as a software developer I like the idea of being able to protect myself from leeches like those 2. it is not the ” Freedom killer ” they make it out to be. It does not matter who steals IP or P the point is that it is there and without it there would be no innovation. If the DMCA was in effect when the Microsoft vs. Apple case came into play, the one where Apple accuses Microsoft of stealing their interface, Microsoft would have lost and would have had to come up with a more original idea. It is guys like Love that make it out to be so bad because now they have to come up with original ideas and not be able to hack and patch all day long. 2003-01-19 8:35 pm No I do not think so. They would do it. Stallman and Love are totally aginst the DMCA, what has the DMCA done to them ? I am glad it is there, as a software developer I like the idea of being able to protect myself from leeches like those 2. it is not the ” Freedom killer ” they make it out to be. It does not matter who steals IP or P the point is that it is there and without it there would be no innovation. If the DMCA was in effect when the Microsoft vs. Apple case came into play, the one where Apple accuses Microsoft of stealing their interface, Microsoft would have lost and would have had to come up with a more original idea. It is guys like Love that make it out to be so bad because now they have to come up with original ideas and not be able to hack and patch all day long. 2003-01-19 8:55 pm There is a better list than GNU-Darwin had (or Apple for that matter since they haven’t updated the docs since 1.4.1) at http://darwinunderground.com/hardware/, which is probably why GNU-Darwin now links to it. It’s not a complete list but it’s growing. And it lets you add systems yourself, sorta like that Be hardware list I used to go to, but it’s not quite as advanced as that. 2003-01-19 9:05 pm Is it just me; but, every-time an Apple or related story comes up on OSNews the the comments remind me of a Monty Python sketch.I have no experience at all of Mac’s and wouldn’t really like to comment on the OS/Hardware one way or another. All I will say is I find the tone and content of so many of the Mac supporters rather strange.It would seem as if getting a Mac is equivalent to joining some fundamentalist religious cult. 2003-01-19 9:59 pm so has anyone actually tried this yet? Is it compatible with vmware now? 2003-01-19 10:23 pm Fine, but I never quite got this thing about dropping PPC support. Is it a good thing put your eggs into intel… hard cooked… 2003-01-19 11:21 pm GNU Darwin is junk, the guy is a stallmanite and it has infected the rest of the project.So what you are saying is that you haven’t actually tried the OS and are basing your entire judgement of this OS on your distaste for RMS? Kind of a weak stance don’t you think?The DMCA is there to protect the people from guys like himself and Richard Stallman so that they will not steal intellectual property.Ha ha ha ha… Yes RMS is against the DMCA, but that doesn’t mean he ever stole anything. Why don’t you actually listen to what RMS is preaching? He actually has some excellent points.The GPL is like a virus it will take good software like Linux and make it unusable for commercial use.How so? You can run non-GPL applications and create non-GPL applications on Linux without violating the GPL. What you cannot do is steal GPL code and place it into your own product and sell that product for a profit to somebody else. The BSD license is considered friendly to companies because companies like Microsoft can dip into BSD code, put it into Windows, and then charge you a bundle for it. As a developer, if I want to donate code to the community, I will definitely donate it via the GPL. If I’m giving a gift away to the world, then I don’t want anybody else dipping into the IP I have generously donated, placing it in a proprietary product and then charging people a lot for it.No companies program for Linux because that means they will have to open up some parts of intellectual propertyYou are very uninformed about the GPL. My company writes several software application on Linux, for Linux. We do not GPL any of it. You are only obligated to GPL code that you acquire from other GPL’ed code. If you write all your code yourself, as we have done, then you don’t have to worry about it.I suggest you actually learn what the GPL is and about the ideas behind it.Without the GPL, Linux would not be where it is today and it wouldn’t be a small threat to Microsoft since they would be able to hijack Linux code for use in Windows; just as they have done with BSD code. 2003-01-20 12:55 am I try to install darwin, in a pentium (400 MHZ) but stops at:PCI ver=2.10 BusCount=2 Features=[ BIOS16 CM1 ]Still waiting for root deviceStill waiting for root deviceStill waiting for root deviceIt would appear that Darwin doesn’t fully support your IDE controller. 2003-01-20 2:00 am There’s 2 versions of the license. The standard GPL, and the lesser (Used to be library) GPL.The GPL and LGPL have been discussed to death all over the place so I’ll just sum up in this “viral” context. (That term really sucks, who came up with it?).Here’s the gist of the standard GPL:Using any part of the code indicates your acceptance of the standard GPL. Should you wish modify the code, include any part of it within your own code, or utilise its functions then your code must also take up the terms of the GPL.Now the LGPL is much more complex, but basically it’s this:So long as your executable contains no part or derivative part of the actual library it can be distributed under your own terms. However, and it’s a big however, if you combine or link to a library which is released under the terms of the LGPL this little sentence comes into effect. “”As an exception to the Sections above, you may also combine or link a “work that uses the Library” with the Library to produce a work containing portions of the Library, and distribute that work under terms of your choice, provided that the terms permit modification of the work for the customer’s own use and reverse engineering for debugging such modifications.””Ie the act of combining/linking places you in a position where your own license must allow for modification and reverse engineering of the code.(I am WELL aware some people won’t agree with this assessment.)Now my personal beef with the idealism of GNU and Stallman isn’t these licenses (I don’t know much about legal wording, but they seem quite poorly defined in some areas). If someone creates some code then what they choose to do with it and how they choose to license it is their own business not mine.My actual problem is with the philisophy behind it. GNU purports to represent “free” software (Free as in speech not beer). Now I would say that placing code under these licenses puts them directly into the domain of proprietary software. Not proprietary because you have to pay anything for them (They truly are free, as in beer), but because the existence of the license binds any future developer using this code to the GPL (And in certain circumstances the LGPL). Now that is purposefully removing the freedom (Now I’m talking about free, as in speech) of any subsequent developer to use this code as they see fit. Terms, licenses and conditions by their very existence destroy the “free” nature of the code.By way of example:“”The Readline library implements input editing and history for interactive programs, and that’s a facility not generally available elsewhere. Releasing it under the GPL and limiting its use to free programs gives our community a real boost. At least one application program is free software today specifically because that was necessary for using Readline. “” Stallman-Feb ’99Admittedly that’s an old comment, but it’s part of an article still posted on the GNU site. Now it’s that last line that bugs me. What he’s saying is that because the Readline library is GPLed, and this application requires Readline to function, the application developers have been effectively forced into releasing under the GPL. And that makes Readline “free”?I don’t know, maybe I’m reading entirely too much into it, but the whole gnu thing just feels wrong to me. That being said they make some decent software. It’s their ideals I don’t like, not their code.Anyhow, enough of such nonsense.Wouldn’t quartz need all kinds of hardware acceleration? Does GNU-Darwin have that already? 2003-01-20 2:35 am What you cannot do is steal GPL code and place it into your own product and sell that product for a profit to somebody elseActually, you can take GPl code and sell a product for a profit. What you are restricted from doing is denying people open access and reproduction to said code. In fact, I think RMS encourages people to make a profit from GNU code. He simply believes that people should have rights to copy and modify it without restriction.Regarding the hostility some have towards the GPL, sometimes I’m surprised. It’s a community effort to have an intellectual commons. If you don’t believe in it, then innovate on your own! Go ahead, while others will build and share with a community. Bye! 2003-01-20 5:13 am Yes i have used the OS I used to be a GNU Darwin developer before Love ruined it. I suggest you read the GPL again because you are WRONG. If you use any part of GPL software you have to release certain parts of the code like I said previously. I have listened to RMS preach and I disagree with all of his points why do you think I do not contribute to GPL software anymore. There are several problems with the GPL and yes it is 99.9% of the reason companies do not write programs for Linux the other .1% is because not enough user base. The APSL is fine, Stallmanites need to revise their mode of thinking on the GPL andrevise it for more companies to actually accept it, otherwise Linux will be stuck in limbo and if it ever becomes mainstream RMS will find some way to mess everything up. No I am not an Apple user, no I do not use OS X, my experience comes with GNU Darwin, Linux and FreeBSD. The DMCA is one of the few laws that the US has ever come up with that actually protects the citizens of this nation. Loves website has this little excerpt on it that says ” Why are foreign scientists afraid to come to the United States…They fear being prosecuted”. Well guys I have news for you, if foreign scientists decide to come to the United States and steal Intellectual Property then yes they do need to be prosecuted. No one gave Elcomsoft permission to hack Adobe Software. Point Blank, Period. They broke the law, yes they need to go to jail. The DMCA doesnt fit Stallmans tastes because he puts Freedom ahead of functionality, he thinks all software needs to be open. I disagree. Proprietary software has its place, Open Source software has its place. If Adobe, Apple, Microsoft and IBM do not want to give away their ideas or their software they shouldnt be forced to. The Adobe Boycott that RMS and Love so gallantly and waving their flags of the righteous supported, didnt even make the news, I heard nothing about it until I saw GNU Darwins site and it mentioned it. The Boycott wasnt very widely accepted peole still used Adobe Products. FreeBSD gives code away, MS uses their TCP/IP stacks I do not see FreeBSD complaining. Not everyone will agree all the time. But you can keep the GPL, I would much rather use the APSL and the BSD License ahead of the GPL. 2003-01-20 5:57 am Bubba wrote: There are several problems with the GPL and yes it is 99.9% of the reason companies do not write programs for Linux the other .1% is because not enough user base.————-Actually, I think the major reason is 50%/50% between small user-base and the difficulties of making commercial products for dozens of different distributions.————–Bubba wrote:The APSL is fine, Stallmanites need to revise their mode of thinking on the GPL and revise it for more companies to actually accept it, otherwise Linux will be stuck in limbo and if it ever becomes mainstream RMS will find some way to mess everything up.———–But linux is already mainstream in the server market and is clearly getting more popular day by day. However, the desktop linux market is a mess.——-The rest of your post, especially the part about the DMCA and Elcomsoft, sounds like plain trolling to me. 2003-01-20 10:46 am I think you completely miss the point of why he was mad at Adobe for using the DMCA. the elcomsoft developer made a program that’s only violation was is that it circumvented a copy protection, and he released the code to it and told people how to do it. no IP was stolen.Now, I think you have some major misconceptions about the GPL, and GNU. the GPL was made to protect intellectual property, actually. It was made to protect open source developers who wanted their code to be safe from companies that would steal it. 2003-01-20 3:42 pm I think you are the one with misconceptions. The GPL doesnt protect anyone, all it does is fuel more nonsense from RMS and others like him, commonly referred to as stallmanites, the GPL wasnt created to make something great. The GPL was created out of spite because Microsoft refused to hire Stallman, if Stallman had gotten the job with Microsoft there would be no GPL, no FSF nothing. As for Elcomsoft they broke the law, you cant turn an Apple into an orange. POINT BLANK PERIOD, they broke the law. When you break the law there is no grey area, you either broke the law or you did not break the law. 2003-01-20 5:07 pm Wow! You must have access to very secret and special files, for, as an historian of CS and IT, you seem to know things and facts nobody has ever heard of. Enlighten us! Give us evidences, links, something. 2003-01-20 6:15 pm Good trolling, nice try. I’m sorry, i don’t have time to answer all of your trolling misconceptions. 2003-01-20 6:31 pm Its not trolling A: B: If you dont have time to answer what you think are misconceptions why did you even post at all, because A: You are a Stallmanite and you think you are trying to be funny B: You have too much time on your hands like I do. 2003-01-21 4:14 am Examine the list of licences that are in play.Notice how they use the FreeBSD ports, yet do not acknologe the FreeBSD licence.