4 ms·

Long time ago, they used to also publish a bootable ISO of Darwin + all of those OSS packages. They did publish an updated Darwin core / kernel a few releases

by Elv13 10y ago

Long time ago, they used to also publish a bootable ISO of Darwin + all of those OSS packages. They did publish an updated Darwin core / kernel a few releases back, but it seems to be closed again. Too bad, I think someone with some determination could have gotten am hypervisor based container tech running on this. Of course the test would not run, but APIs shims could have made whole software compile (but not link). This in itself would have been very useful for a lot of people. Being able to compile in a container then link in the "real" macOS could also have been implemented, making this much more useful.

huilee 10y ago
If Apple open sourced all of macOS maybe that would put more pressure on Microsoft to intentionally[1] open source Windows. [1]: It has been open sourced in the past: https://torrentfreak.com/microsoft-takes-pirated-windows-nt-4-0-source-code-offline-150415/ https://torrentfreak.com/microsoft-takes-pirated-windows-nt-... http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1030335/leaked-windows-2000-source-code-analysed http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1030335/leaked-wind...
- bad_user 10y ago
  Leaked source code is not open source dude. Open source is software licensed under terms compatible with these rules: https://opensource.org/osd https://opensource.org/osd
  - minxomat 10y ago
    Both the Windows Server 2003 x86 and the Windows XP amd64 kernel source code have been available for academic purposes. They are governed under the WRT License, which forbids re-distribution outside of the academic use. But yes, MS provided that source code with full documentation on how to build and debug each kernel. I've built the WinXP kernel a few months ago just for nostalgic purposes, here's a VM running the custom kernel with a KDBG hook on NTQSysInfo [1]. The neat thing is that you can debug on the system itself, or via a serial port. I also know that some people had success merging the /base/ code from the above licensed kernel (but the x86 version) and the leaked WinNT4 code. One even got so far as to manage a recompile of the NT setup, building a custom NT OS from scratch. Though that's violating the WRK and NT license left and right. [1] http://i.imgur.com/BeiME5X.png http://i.imgur.com/BeiME5X.png
    - bad_user 10y ago
      You're talking about cool things, no doubt about it, but code made available for academic purposes only is still not open source. This isn't just pedantry, we are scientists from different countries, with many of us having learned English as a second or third language (I'm from Romania, hi), so it's better to be precise in language. And in this instance "open source" is a good term to be precise about, because the OSI definition specifies exactly what you can and cannot do with it. And in particular (1) you can use it for any purpose, even for evil ones and (2) you can fork it and modify it in any way you wish. So when I hear "open source", I don't have to go and read the license and validate that these requirements are true, because OSI has already done that for me and they have lawyers that know how to read licenses. This saves me time, headaches and money. And academic, non-commercial licenses do not qualify. Microsoft itself has introduced an alternative term for such academic, non-commercial licenses and I think it's a good one: Shared Source. Lets use it.
      - pksadiq 10y ago
        > So when I hear "open source", I don't have to go and read the license and validate that these requirements are true...... This saves me time, headaches and money. Most of us have some vague understanding about Licenses. Eg: MIT/X11 specifically says "...FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT..." but it is "open source" That is, if you earn too much money from some MIT License software, the author itself is free to sue you the way he/she can (eg, patents). One example could be dotNet from M$. So better stick to software pieces that are licensed under GNU [A]GPLv3 or Apache v2 (If you care patent issues). Also, note that you can trust "free software" guys more than "open source" ones. edit: Also note that this can also be a reason why Apple didn't update any GNU packages once they were relicensed to GPLv3+. (The main reason could be the GPLv3 requirement that the user should be able to replace the software if [s]he wish to. Apache doesn't have this requirement, and Apple used that for swift)
        mcintyre1994 10y ago
        > One example could be dotNet from M$. If you ignore the patent grant, sure.
- hellofunk 10y ago
  > [1]: It has been open sourced in the past: I am really hoping that you were joking.
  - huilee 10y ago
    You got it. Was missing the air-quotes.
- umanwizard 10y ago
  People who are downvoting you into the pavement are misguided, I think. Your point is still interesting even if the terminology you used is wrong.
  - mverwijs 10y ago
    I downvoted because stating that Windows has been open sourced in the past is misinformation and should be marked as such.
- Elv13 10y ago
  OS X and Mac OS X 10.0-10.6 _ARE_ open source. Most services (including Quartz, the display server) are not. macOS could be once there is a new code drop, if they ever bother.
- huilee 10y ago
  I meant "open sourced". I was being sarcastic. I "absolutely love" how literal all of you are. See that? I used quotes that time. Happy F'ing Thanksgiving.

by Elv13 10y ago

huilee 10y ago

If Apple open sourced all of macOS maybe that would put more pressure on Microsoft to intentionally[1] open source Windows. [1]: It has been open sourced in the past: https://torrentfreak.com/microsoft-takes-pirated-windows-nt-4-0-source-code-offline-150415/ https://torrentfreak.com/microsoft-takes-pirated-windows-nt-... http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1030335/leaked-windows-2000-source-code-analysed http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1030335/leaked-wind...

bad_user 10y ago
Leaked source code is not open source dude. Open source is software licensed under terms compatible with these rules: https://opensource.org/osd https://opensource.org/osd
- minxomat 10y ago
  Both the Windows Server 2003 x86 and the Windows XP amd64 kernel source code have been available for academic purposes. They are governed under the WRT License, which forbids re-distribution outside of the academic use. But yes, MS provided that source code with full documentation on how to build and debug each kernel. I've built the WinXP kernel a few months ago just for nostalgic purposes, here's a VM running the custom kernel with a KDBG hook on NTQSysInfo [1]. The neat thing is that you can debug on the system itself, or via a serial port. I also know that some people had success merging the /base/ code from the above licensed kernel (but the x86 version) and the leaked WinNT4 code. One even got so far as to manage a recompile of the NT setup, building a custom NT OS from scratch. Though that's violating the WRK and NT license left and right. [1] http://i.imgur.com/BeiME5X.png http://i.imgur.com/BeiME5X.png
  - bad_user 10y ago
    You're talking about cool things, no doubt about it, but code made available for academic purposes only is still not open source. This isn't just pedantry, we are scientists from different countries, with many of us having learned English as a second or third language (I'm from Romania, hi), so it's better to be precise in language. And in this instance "open source" is a good term to be precise about, because the OSI definition specifies exactly what you can and cannot do with it. And in particular (1) you can use it for any purpose, even for evil ones and (2) you can fork it and modify it in any way you wish. So when I hear "open source", I don't have to go and read the license and validate that these requirements are true, because OSI has already done that for me and they have lawyers that know how to read licenses. This saves me time, headaches and money. And academic, non-commercial licenses do not qualify. Microsoft itself has introduced an alternative term for such academic, non-commercial licenses and I think it's a good one: Shared Source. Lets use it.
    - pksadiq 10y ago
      > So when I hear "open source", I don't have to go and read the license and validate that these requirements are true...... This saves me time, headaches and money. Most of us have some vague understanding about Licenses. Eg: MIT/X11 specifically says "...FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT..." but it is "open source" That is, if you earn too much money from some MIT License software, the author itself is free to sue you the way he/she can (eg, patents). One example could be dotNet from M$. So better stick to software pieces that are licensed under GNU [A]GPLv3 or Apache v2 (If you care patent issues). Also, note that you can trust "free software" guys more than "open source" ones. edit: Also note that this can also be a reason why Apple didn't update any GNU packages once they were relicensed to GPLv3+. (The main reason could be the GPLv3 requirement that the user should be able to replace the software if [s]he wish to. Apache doesn't have this requirement, and Apple used that for swift)
      - mcintyre1994 10y ago
        > One example could be dotNet from M$. If you ignore the patent grant, sure.
hellofunk 10y ago
> [1]: It has been open sourced in the past: I am really hoping that you were joking.
- huilee 10y ago
  You got it. Was missing the air-quotes.
umanwizard 10y ago
People who are downvoting you into the pavement are misguided, I think. Your point is still interesting even if the terminology you used is wrong.
- mverwijs 10y ago
  I downvoted because stating that Windows has been open sourced in the past is misinformation and should be marked as such.
Elv13 10y ago
OS X and Mac OS X 10.0-10.6 _ARE_ open source. Most services (including Quartz, the display server) are not. macOS could be once there is a new code drop, if they ever bother.
huilee 10y ago
I meant "open sourced". I was being sarcastic. I "absolutely love" how literal all of you are. See that? I used quotes that time. Happy F'ing Thanksgiving.