4 ms·

My mac using coworkers constantly complain that the *NIX parts of Mac are ancient and out of date and already use a linux VMs on top of Mac for better bash or w

by bragr 4y ago

My mac using coworkers constantly complain that the *NIX parts of Mac are ancient and out of date and already use a linux VMs on top of Mac for better bash or whatever.

atonse 4y ago
Which parts in particular? I’ve seen literally hundreds of developers use macOS (including myself) for over a decade either at work/ conferences/meetups and never seen them use a Linux VM apart from something like docker, etc.
selectodude 4y ago
brew install bash has always worked for me.
- philistine 4y ago
  what's wrong with zsh?
  - mr_toad 4y ago
    It’s fine unless you need to run a bash script.
fragmede 4y ago
But then you have to deal with a VM on top of the host macOS. IMO it's way easier to install brew, install an up to date copy of bash (which is more recent than Ubuntu has), and coreutils, and just use macOS. Having to do gls occasionally (for GNU ls) is minorly annoying, but way less work than a whole freaking VM. https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/bash https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/bash shows version 5.2.15. https://packages.ubuntu.com/kinetic/bash https://packages.ubuntu.com/kinetic/bash (well http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/b/bash/bash_5.2-1ubuntu2/changelog http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/b/bash/bas...) shows 5.2.1+debian/ubuntu patches.
jjtheblunt 4y ago
They might be bumping into old versions of utilities up to just before GPLv3. From GPLv3 onwards, Apple has had to leave installation of newer versions of tools to users, legally, our publish their own proprietary IP, Stallman’s objective some would say.
- teddyh 4y ago
  > [or] publish their own proprietary IP That’s simply FUD. Apple seemed to be able to use GPLv2 without any consequences, and GPLv3 has all the same properties in that regard. The real reason is likely this: https://meta.ath0.com/2012/02/05/apples-great-gpl-purge/ https://meta.ath0.com/2012/02/05/apples-great-gpl-purge/ […] Anyway, the message is pretty obvious: Apple won’t ship anything that’s licensed under GPL v3 on OS X. Now, why is that? There are two big changes in GPL v3. The first is that it explicitly prohibits patent lawsuits against people for actually using the GPL-licensed software you ship. The second is that it carefully prevents TiVoization, locking down hardware so that people can’t actually run the software they want. So, which of those things are they planning for OS X, eh? I’m also intrigued to see how far they are prepared to go with this. They already annoyed and inconvenienced a lot of people with the Samba and GCC removal. Having wooed so many developers to the Mac in the last decade, are they really prepared to throw away all that goodwill by shipping obsolete tools and making it a pain in the ass to upgrade them?
  - shaunsingh 4y ago
    Is there any reason to use GCC over Clang these days? I haven't used GCC in the past 5-6 years, and I don't miss it.
    - teddyh 4y ago
      From what I hear, Clang development has slowed to a crawl and GCC leads in new standards compliance and features, since major past Clang supporters have stopped contributing to concentrate on their own languages. But I see that user ‘pjmlp’, who probably has a much more informed opinion than mine, is posting in this thread.
  - 4y ago
pjmlp 4y ago
They are quite up to date with UNIX, what they aren't is GNU clones.

by bragr 4y ago

My mac using coworkers constantly complain that the *NIX parts of Mac are ancient and out of date and already use a linux VMs on top of Mac for better bash or whatever.

atonse 4y ago

Which parts in particular? I’ve seen literally hundreds of developers use macOS (including myself) for over a decade either at work/ conferences/meetups and never seen them use a Linux VM apart from something like docker, etc.

selectodude 4y ago

brew install bash has always worked for me.

philistine 4y ago
what's wrong with zsh?
- mr_toad 4y ago
  It’s fine unless you need to run a bash script.

fragmede 4y ago

But then you have to deal with a VM on top of the host macOS. IMO it's way easier to install brew, install an up to date copy of bash (which is more recent than Ubuntu has), and coreutils, and just use macOS. Having to do gls occasionally (for GNU ls) is minorly annoying, but way less work than a whole freaking VM. https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/bash https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/bash shows version 5.2.15. https://packages.ubuntu.com/kinetic/bash https://packages.ubuntu.com/kinetic/bash (well http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/b/bash/bash_5.2-1ubuntu2/changelog http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/b/bash/bas...) shows 5.2.1+debian/ubuntu patches.

jjtheblunt 4y ago

They might be bumping into old versions of utilities up to just before GPLv3. From GPLv3 onwards, Apple has had to leave installation of newer versions of tools to users, legally, our publish their own proprietary IP, Stallman’s objective some would say.

teddyh 4y ago
> [or] publish their own proprietary IP That’s simply FUD. Apple seemed to be able to use GPLv2 without any consequences, and GPLv3 has all the same properties in that regard. The real reason is likely this: https://meta.ath0.com/2012/02/05/apples-great-gpl-purge/ https://meta.ath0.com/2012/02/05/apples-great-gpl-purge/ […] Anyway, the message is pretty obvious: Apple won’t ship anything that’s licensed under GPL v3 on OS X. Now, why is that? There are two big changes in GPL v3. The first is that it explicitly prohibits patent lawsuits against people for actually using the GPL-licensed software you ship. The second is that it carefully prevents TiVoization, locking down hardware so that people can’t actually run the software they want. So, which of those things are they planning for OS X, eh? I’m also intrigued to see how far they are prepared to go with this. They already annoyed and inconvenienced a lot of people with the Samba and GCC removal. Having wooed so many developers to the Mac in the last decade, are they really prepared to throw away all that goodwill by shipping obsolete tools and making it a pain in the ass to upgrade them?
- shaunsingh 4y ago
  Is there any reason to use GCC over Clang these days? I haven't used GCC in the past 5-6 years, and I don't miss it.
  - teddyh 4y ago
    From what I hear, Clang development has slowed to a crawl and GCC leads in new standards compliance and features, since major past Clang supporters have stopped contributing to concentrate on their own languages. But I see that user ‘pjmlp’, who probably has a much more informed opinion than mine, is posting in this thread.
- 4y ago

pjmlp 4y ago

They are quite up to date with UNIX, what they aren't is GNU clones.