Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Porting Unix Command-Line Tools to Mac OS X

Posted by pudge on from the mmmm-command-lines dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Over at Apple has posted a technote on porting Unix programs to Mac OS X. Nothing earth-shattering, but nice to see it all collected."

6 of 92 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Makes Mac OS easier to use! by feldsteins · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You seem to think this story represents some kind of "move" that it does not. I'm guessing you're not all that familiar with OS X. Fro example, there is no "hiding" of the command line. There's an application called "Terminal" that, when launched, gives you a standard tcsh command line. It no more "hidden" than their "add a printer" utility.

    I recommend you try OS X sometime. You might like it. At the very least you'll understand a little more than it's a bona fide Unix operating system and hasn't been "dumbed down" as you seem to imply.

    --
    You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
  2. The Point. by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The reason I use OS X is basicly because I have access to the UNIX command-line tools and I can usually easily port them to OS X. OS X has a nice set of application that are comericalially available Like Photoshop (I know the gimp is close but Photoshop works better for me) so I can do my Unix stuff at the command line and have access to some good comerical software. It is like having the best of both worlds. That and sometimes having the ability to pipe information is really good.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  3. Err, it's a BSD system, not a GNU system. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It used BSD tools, not GNU tools.

    Deal with it.

  4. Re:So by Znonymous+Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Then there's no point in paying Apple employees to work on porting the stuff.

    Yes there is, it's called value added software. It wouldn't cost very much to do it. Then maybe more geeks would buy macs.

    And don't tell me that geeks don't like macs. If they didn't, there wouldn't be a apple.slashdot.org

    nuff said

    --

    Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.

  5. Re:So by anothy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    first:
    I have been annoyed on several occassions that the BSD command line utilities Apple provides lacked some feature that the GNU utilities have (I recall just replacing Apple's 'ls' with the GNU equivalent outright).
    then, in the very next sentance:
    At the same time, I don't want to mess with Fink, it introduces complexity.
    and, just to close it up:
    I'd much rather that Apple just installed the GNU stuff by default.
    man! i've got mod points, and i almost moderated this funny, but i wanted to make sure people got it. you don't want extra complexity, but you prefer the GNU tools to the BSD tools? y'er kiddin', right? how on earth can anyone make sense of that? the GNU tools are, on average, dramatically more complicated than the BSD tools. i used to build Linux boxes that dumped the GNU tools in favor of the BSD tools. then i got annoyed with the GNU C library and tried swapping that out. halfway through the project of rebuilding everything so that it didn't have the stupid glibc dependancies, i got fed up and went back to a BSD system - because the tools were so much simpler. Apple made a great decision in using the BSD tools rather than the GNU tools (license questions aside).

    oh, and as a parting kick:
    ...in Linux you can just assemble your system to do what you want.
    right. yup. unless you want it to be a good desktop system.
    --

    i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
  6. Re:So by WatertonMan · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Those who are able to recognize the difference between GNU versions of the BSD utilities are savvy enough to install the GNU utilities or Fink. If you don't like Fink check out Darwinports which is a different approach to the issue. It sounds more like what you want. A lot of us prefer having all the custom source code in /sw rather than replacing the standard BSD stuff from Apple so that we have access to both.

    DarwinPorts