Slashdot Mirror


The GNU-Darwin World

proclus writes "The GNU-Darwin Distribution was founded to leverage the open source development dynamic and build the infrastructure for scientific computing on a new platform. Now GNU-Darwin is a major free software project, and the infrastructure, such as parallel computing and molecular graphics software is available to everyone via the web and on digital media discs. Check it out. Also, Apple has written up a story about it."

22 of 135 comments (clear)

  1. Why does SRC ports have to be DISTRO Specific? by BrookHarty · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'll be glad when someone creates a generic Ports that works across all platforms. The news that Gentoo, Fink and Darwin ports where working together was great news. Gentoo has Linux, Fink Has MacOSX, and GnuDarwin has x86 and PPC.

    FreeBSD/OpenBSD and all those Linux (Cooker type) distros have broken ports. Even the Binary only distros have broken packages. I think OpenBSD said 20%+ of BSD ports where broken, (anyone have the numbers?). This could fix all those problems across platforms.

    Very nice.

    1. Re:Why does SRC ports have to be DISTRO Specific? by burns210 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      the problem with this, as i had a similar idea in an earlier post, and this was pointed out was: what about when 1 project is very much in need of highly portable code, while another project isn't... as in, netbsd couldn't necesarily join this universal ports, because they need to have all their ports compile across everything with a microprocessor(this is not a bad thing, btw) but a linux or darwin project only cares about x86/ppc architectures.

  2. Re:I gave up on the Mac by BrookHarty · · Score: 4, Informative

    So this makes me wonder what the point is of using Darwin. With OS X as a whole, there are some specific benefits that exist. Apple has UI standards in place, provides some services, like iTunes, that you may want. They've done a lot of eye candy. But is there any real point in using Darwin alone versus, say, Linux? Or, if you specifically want BSD, then compare it to plain ol' FreeBSD. I mean, what's the point?

    True, I wouldnt use Darwin either.

    Linux and FreeBSD are my opensource distros of choice. But for Daily work, OSX gives me the power of *nix OS with all the same software. Throw in iTunes, and the nice collection of applications for OSX, its a hard OS to ignore if your a unix junkie.

    And dont understimate eye-candy, KDE and Gnome look great, OSX looks perfect. Great time for opensource, pick your candy.

  3. Re:Not Free. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually, the GPL imposes restrictions on further distribution. Therefore, it can't possibly be considered free compared to a license like BSD.

  4. Jargon by mrpuffypants · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...digital media discs...

    so...like....it's on CDs?

  5. Confusing... by jbx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    GNU is open source.
    Darwin is open source.
    So... what exactly are we getting here? LinuxPPC is faster than Darwin, so if you wanted something closer to GNU than Darwin, wouldn't you use that?

    What's the user benefit? This is for people who bought a Mac and don't want Apple's GUI work? Or is this all the stuff that Apple would like to put in Darwin, but can't, due to the GPL license?

    Speaking of which, there's this:
    Please note: GNU Project considers Darwin non-free software and therefore does not recommend the use of this operating system. (see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/apsl.html)

    I mean, let me get this straight: GNU Darwin is the version of Darwin that the GNU project doesn't recommend?

    Can someone clear this up in plain English?

    --
    (sig) The last bug isn't fixed until the last user is dead. (/sig)
    1. Re:Confusing... by Halo1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think it's simplest to say that the GPL is about the freedom of the code (i.e., once the code is Free, it has to stay Free) and as such the freedom of the community at large (since this means that over time, they will almost by definition get a larger choice), while the BSD license is more about the personal freedom of users/companies (to do whatever they want with the code). Imho, it's not about which one is more Free than the other, they simply focus on different (contradicting) freedoms: the freedom of the individual vs. the freedom of the community.

      --
      Donate free food here
    2. Re:Confusing... by Halo1 · · Score: 4, Informative
      I mean, let me get this straight: GNU Darwin is the version of Darwin that the GNU project doesn't recommend?
      GNU Darwin is simply Darwin with all BSD-lincensed programs (such as curl) replaced with GPL ones (wget) and a lot of extra programs (only GPL licensed ones obviously). It's still not a "pure" GPL system, as the kernel, most kernel extensions and probably some libraries will always be APSL (otherwise it wouldn't be Darwin anymore).
      --
      Donate free food here
    3. Re:Confusing... by leviramsey · · Score: 3, Informative
      Well GNU even considers FreeBSD non-free software because of the BSD license.

      Incorrect. From The GNU License List:

      [GPL-compatible Free Software Licenses]
      The modified BSD license.
      (Note: on the preceding link, the modified BSD license is listed in the "General" section.)
      This is the original BSD license, modified by removal of the advertising clause. It is a simple, permissive non-copyleft free software license, compatible with the GNU GPL.
      If you want a simple, permissive non-copyleft free software license, the modified BSD license is a reasonable choice. However, it is risky to recommend use of ``the BSD license'', because confusion could easily occur and lead to use of the flawed original BSD license. To avoid this risk, you can suggest the X11 license instead. The X11 license and the revised BSD license are more or less equivalent.


      [GPL-Incompatible Free Software Licenses]
      The original BSD license.
      (Note: on the preceding link, the original BSD license is listed in the "UCB/LBL" section.) This is a simple, permissive non-copyleft free software license with a serious flaw: the ``obnoxious BSD advertising clause''. The flaw is not fatal; that is, it does not render the software non-free. But it does cause practical problems, including incompatibility with the GNU GPL.
      We urge you not to use the original BSD license for software you write. If you want to use a simple, permissive non-copyleft free software license, it is much better to use the modified BSD license or the X11 license. However, there is no reason not to use programs that have been released under the original BSD license.

      Basically because of the advertising clause in the original BSD license, that license is considered GPL-incompatible. GPL incompatibility basically means that you cannot incorporate code licensed under those terms into a GPL project in any way. For instance, it is technically a GPL violation to link a GPL'd program (either statically or dynamically) to OpenSSL, though many projects look the other way (gaim, however, does not look the other way there, for instance).

  6. GNU-Darwin Background by pudge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the distribution that swore off PPC development because of political reasons, basically saying that Apple is so bad that they can't continue to use any part of the platform they are based on, but yet they are still producing that which they said they wouldn't (new stuff for PPC). They say silly things like "the most free" distribution, as if such a phrase has any meaning. They claim to be the premiere free software distribution for Mac OS X, which is plainly false, unless you are deluded into believing that only copylefted software is free software.

    This is a project driven almost solely by politics, not technology, and they can't even be consistent there. Beware.

    1. Re:GNU-Darwin Background by pudge · · Score: 3, Funny

      The answer is clear to anyone who is willing to take our many accomplisments at face value. It is clear to anyone who is willing to come to the source for their info instead of running to gossips, liars, and fud masters.

      If you cannot provide a clear explanation of your own policies, how do you expect anyone to care about your project?
      This thread is dead.

      No, it's in maintenance mode.

  7. Re:GNU-Darwin Background - Pudge is right by kuwan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I used to follow the GNU-Darwin project quite heavily. I had installed it along side OS X and was even on the mailing lists. I must say that they do (or at least did) have extremely talented developers that have done a lot of good work for the project.

    However, I found through the mailing list that the project is political to the extreme. Their most extreme bit of politics came when they decided to "discontinue" PPC development (as pudge mentioned) because they had issues with Apple. They were arrogant enough to think that this move would force Apple to backtrack on the things they had issues with.

    It was about that time that I decided to drop GNU-Darwin completely. What kind of project drops support for the hardware that > 90% of their user-base is using? Well, from the looks of it they, not Apple, have backtracked and are still supporting PPC.

    My advice would be to not take a second look at GNU-Darwin. Use Fink or OpenDarwin instead.

  8. Re:GNU-Darwin Background - Pudge is right by liyanage · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I absolutely agree with this and the parent post.

    The politics and annoying GNU/GPL preaching on various mailing lists (and in the early days the insistence on installing/stomping onto Apple-supplied system parts in /usr/ instead of /usr/local) is what turned me off GNU-Darwin.

  9. Which Darwin? by CameronWolf · · Score: 3, Informative

    There are three "Darwin" DARWIN proper is the one used by Apple and coresponds directly with OSX releases. OPENDARWIN was founded by Apple and ISC to allow more people to contribute to Darwin. Apple takes no responsibility for OPENDARWIN. Features found in OPENDARWIN may find there way into Apples DARWIN. GNU-DARWIN is totally GPL. It was founded in response to APSL.

  10. Poor Examples by Llywelyn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You seem to drift topics. The APSL has nothing to do with FCP, Safari, or anything else in those lanes.

    >FCP

    Best of its class, hands down. This is called "making a competing product" and is normal business strategy--not forcing someone out of the market.

    >Safari

    You really need to stop drinking the Kool Aid.

    No one really competes with Safari, not because Safari, but because Safari is *good*. Apple distributed a sucky version of IE as its standard web-browser and that has a *lot* to do with the user experience for a typical user. They needed to replace it, and no other web-browser for the mac quite cut it.

    Once again. They produced a better product. Safari is now my primary web browser, not because I haven't used Mozilla or Camino, but because it is the best for what I do on the web (speed counts for a lot).

    >Soundtrack

    Who did Apple "force out" with this one?

    They also needed something so that labels could publish music in m4p format, suitable for the iTMS.

    You want an example? Take Watson. But none of your examples quite cut it.

    --
    Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
  11. Re:I gave up on the Mac by Senjaz · · Score: 5, Informative

    If Apple hadn't stopped their cloning experiments which where at the time killing their own hardware sales then it's questionable whether Apple would still be here.

    And we then we wouldn't have had Mac OS X. No Mac OS X, no darwin.

    You have a valid point for most geeks, what's the point of using it over Linux or BSD.

    One thing I will point out though is that it is a real boon having that entire layer of the OS open if your job is writing things like kext's and device drivers.

    --
    Don't blame me - this .sig had steal me written all over it.
  12. Re:I gave up on the Mac by JonathanBoyd · · Score: 3, Informative
    Apple killed that when they killed the clones. They had a choice, and knew it, and considered it. They could have tried to become a mainstream manufacturer, with a lot of clout, and instead they chose to remain a high-priced niche manufacturer.

    Actually, the clones weren't expanding marketshare - they were just eating into Apples, and at a time when Apple wasn't in a particularly healthy situation. Apple's 'choice' was kill the clones and survive, or let them keep going and die in a couple of years time, leaving the Mac market dead as well.

  13. Re:GNU-Darwin Background - Pudge is right by Pathwalker · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Plus they are still running unchecked binaries right after they download them.

    Take a look at their quickstart script, which they suggest that you use by piping it to csh as root.

    The first few steps:
    1. Download a compiled wget binary using curl
    2. chmod 755 wget
    3. put wget in /usr/local/bin
    4. use the new wget to download some other code

    They never check to see if the download was corrupted, or if someone had replaced it with something else.
    Is it so hard to do something like:
    ...download wget...
    if [ `cksum wget | cut -f1 -d\ ` != 2989954681 ]
    then
    echo "Someone is playing silly buggers..."
    exit
    fi
    ...install wget...
    For each of the few programs and libraries that they need to download to get the package manager up and running?

    I've complained about this before, and I'm sorry to have to do so again, but running an unverified binary as root right after you download it is one of the STUPIDEST ideas I have seen.
  14. Re:GNU-Darwin Background: Pudge is Right! by pudge · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We never said that we would produce no more new stuff for PPC, but rather that we would not link to proprietary libraries.

    You yourself wrote: Second, we will be moving our operations to x86, and we are putting the ppc collection into maintenance mode. Read it yourself if you forget.

  15. Re:GNU-Darwin Background: Pudge is Right! by pudge · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maintanence mode means that we will continue to provide updates and support.

    So ... this is different from how it was before, how, exactly? And how does the addition of brand-new PPC packages square with this?

  16. Re:GNU-Darwin Background - Pudge is right by ProfKyne · · Score: 5, Funny

    Guess that makes them eligible for the Darwin awards.

    --
    "First you gotta do the truffle shuffle."
  17. Parent is pure flamebait. by BitGeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Macs have been a better deal pricewise than PCs since 1995.

    Its time to stop modding up "insightful" every troll who comes along and whines about Macs being "expensive". IT just isn't true, and its a sure sign the person has never used a Mac.

    And the point to Darwin, since you're ignorant of what it is, is that it has Apples new IO system, IOKit, and quite a variety of other stuff that is Apple written, and does not exist in BSD or Linux OSes (unless its migrated there.)

    There's more to OSX than "eye candy".... if you were a Mac developer as you claim, you'd know that.

    --
    Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257