5 ms·

IOS 4.3 sources are available

77 points by singingwolfboy 15y ago

zerosanity 15y ago
The release of this code should be an item on the product launch checklist.
- edw 15y ago
  All ice cream should be coffee flavored.
  - jrockway 15y ago
    More like, "all legal requirements around the redistribution of code we used should be followed."
    - edw 15y ago
      Yeah, you're wrong. Apple's acceptance of paragraph three of the GPL (assuming version two) doesn't require that "the release of this code should be an item on the product launch checklist." That's all I was saying: "Should" is a word handy for brow-beating. In usages like the above, it expresses an opinion, often one with little support.
davo 15y ago
What is this? Can someone give me an insight of these sources?
- zerosanity 15y ago
  See http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2521488 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2521488
smackfu 15y ago
Possible responses: a) See! That was a lot of noise about nothing. b) See! Without that noise they wouldn't have done anything.
- rauljara 15y ago
  I agree that b) is the correct interpretation of events. And I would add that they shouldn't be let off the hook if they are late again. However, if corporations see that: a) the community's response to non-release is complaining b) the community's response to remedying the non-releasal is more complaining then the community is not giving very strong incentives for corporations to change their behavior. I think Apple should get some praise for releasing the code. Not because they were right all along, but because I would like the corporate world to see that there are good will benefits to playing by the rules. Stick, yes. But also carrot. Good job for fixing the situation, Apple. We all like things much better this way. Let's not go through this again, okay?
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
tobylane 15y ago
If you aren't sure what they are - javascriptcore and webcore have their origins in KHTML, no matter how much of it has been replaced by Apple it's still from that, gcc and gdb are well known GNU parts. CCtools seems to have Darwin origins, they chose to open source it.
Xuzz 15y ago
This is a step forward, but they are still violating the license. Those releases do not have the necessary information to build a new copy, as required by the LGPL: no project IDE (Xcode) files and no makefiles for the iPhone. And, as saurik mentions here (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2523786 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2523786), they do not even release the full source code! Even if you ignore the point about building your own copy, they are still violating the LGPL: releasing the code to those "WAK" classes is not optional.
- matthavener 15y ago
  What is "WAK"?
  - Xuzz 15y ago
    WAK is a set of classes in WebCore. They are released in the Mac code releases, for example: http://opensource.apple.com/source/WebCore/WebCore-351.9/wak/WAKStringDrawing.h http://opensource.apple.com/source/WebCore/WebCore-351.9/wak... For some reason, Apple does not include them in the iOS releases, in a violation of the LGPL.
    - cube13 15y ago
      Uh, they did release it. http://opensource.apple.com/source/WebCore/WebCore-955.66.1/wak/WAKStringDrawing.h http://opensource.apple.com/source/WebCore/WebCore-955.66.1/... The source is here: http://opensource.apple.com/source/WebCore/WebCore-955.66.1/wak/ http://opensource.apple.com/source/WebCore/WebCore-955.66.1/... EDIT: I'm probably missing something, but it appears that the wak code was present since 1.0.
      - Xuzz 15y ago
        Those are headers, not the implementations. If you find the .m files that go with those, that'd be awesome, but they do not appear to release them.
alecco 15y ago
The title is a bit misleading since it's only sources of a few tools used in Apple's iOS.
- Zev 15y ago
  These sources are the same ones that Apple released for 4.2, 4.1, and so on. Maybe Apple just didn't modify any of the other tools/libraries used in iOS (or the other tools/libraries have a license that doesn't require the modifications to be released.
  - cube13 15y ago
    Most of it(especially the javascript and webcore libraries) were present in iOS 1.0, and Apple was fairly quick on releasing the source then, so it was odd that Apple took their time releasing the source. The 4.3 releases took almost 2 months to get out.

zerosanity 15y ago

The release of this code should be an item on the product launch checklist.

edw 15y ago
All ice cream should be coffee flavored.
- jrockway 15y ago
  More like, "all legal requirements around the redistribution of code we used should be followed."
  - edw 15y ago
    Yeah, you're wrong. Apple's acceptance of paragraph three of the GPL (assuming version two) doesn't require that "the release of this code should be an item on the product launch checklist." That's all I was saying: "Should" is a word handy for brow-beating. In usages like the above, it expresses an opinion, often one with little support.

davo 15y ago

What is this? Can someone give me an insight of these sources?

zerosanity 15y ago
See http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2521488 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2521488

smackfu 15y ago

Possible responses: a) See! That was a lot of noise about nothing. b) See! Without that noise they wouldn't have done anything.

rauljara 15y ago
I agree that b) is the correct interpretation of events. And I would add that they shouldn't be let off the hook if they are late again. However, if corporations see that: a) the community's response to non-release is complaining b) the community's response to remedying the non-releasal is more complaining then the community is not giving very strong incentives for corporations to change their behavior. I think Apple should get some praise for releasing the code. Not because they were right all along, but because I would like the corporate world to see that there are good will benefits to playing by the rules. Stick, yes. But also carrot. Good job for fixing the situation, Apple. We all like things much better this way. Let's not go through this again, okay?
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

tobylane 15y ago

If you aren't sure what they are - javascriptcore and webcore have their origins in KHTML, no matter how much of it has been replaced by Apple it's still from that, gcc and gdb are well known GNU parts. CCtools seems to have Darwin origins, they chose to open source it.

Xuzz 15y ago

This is a step forward, but they are still violating the license. Those releases do not have the necessary information to build a new copy, as required by the LGPL: no project IDE (Xcode) files and no makefiles for the iPhone. And, as saurik mentions here (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2523786 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2523786), they do not even release the full source code! Even if you ignore the point about building your own copy, they are still violating the LGPL: releasing the code to those "WAK" classes is not optional.

matthavener 15y ago
What is "WAK"?
- Xuzz 15y ago
  WAK is a set of classes in WebCore. They are released in the Mac code releases, for example: http://opensource.apple.com/source/WebCore/WebCore-351.9/wak/WAKStringDrawing.h http://opensource.apple.com/source/WebCore/WebCore-351.9/wak... For some reason, Apple does not include them in the iOS releases, in a violation of the LGPL.
  - cube13 15y ago
    Uh, they did release it. http://opensource.apple.com/source/WebCore/WebCore-955.66.1/wak/WAKStringDrawing.h http://opensource.apple.com/source/WebCore/WebCore-955.66.1/... The source is here: http://opensource.apple.com/source/WebCore/WebCore-955.66.1/wak/ http://opensource.apple.com/source/WebCore/WebCore-955.66.1/... EDIT: I'm probably missing something, but it appears that the wak code was present since 1.0.
    - Xuzz 15y ago
      Those are headers, not the implementations. If you find the .m files that go with those, that'd be awesome, but they do not appear to release them.

alecco 15y ago

The title is a bit misleading since it's only sources of a few tools used in Apple's iOS.

Zev 15y ago
These sources are the same ones that Apple released for 4.2, 4.1, and so on. Maybe Apple just didn't modify any of the other tools/libraries used in iOS (or the other tools/libraries have a license that doesn't require the modifications to be released.
- cube13 15y ago
  Most of it(especially the javascript and webcore libraries) were present in iOS 1.0, and Apple was fairly quick on releasing the source then, so it was odd that Apple took their time releasing the source. The 4.3 releases took almost 2 months to get out.