3 ms·
yeah it's old. personally i'm wondering how complicated it would be to have a transparent wineish layer for running mac binaries on linux. the kernel modules ar
by rjzzleep 13y ago
yeah it's old. personally i'm wondering how complicated it would be to have a transparent wineish layer for running mac binaries on linux. the kernel modules are i guess the biggest problem, but last i remember they were fairly heavily based on their freebsd counterparts(well, at least many years ago)
i wish vmware workstation in linux was as good as the mac and windows counterparts ... then i could just run linux as my main os on my mba again
- Sanddancer 13y agoThe biggest problem would be the binary loader. OS X uses the Mach-O executable format, as opposed to the ELF format used in other unixes. There is a project to get Mach-O binaries to be usable under other unixes,, but it looks to be a ways off still -- http://darling.dolezel.info/en/Darling http://darling.dolezel.info/en/Darling
- adamnemecek 13y agoI really don't think that a binary loader would be that big of an issue. Unless I'm missing something, I would say that it would be one of the easier things. I'd guess that implementing all the frameworks would be the worst part.
- barrkel 13y agoThere isn't a whole lot of magic in loaders. They do much the same job as linkers, except instead of files on disk, they set up pages in memory. All the import slots are filled with references to all the corresponding exports, until all imports are satisfied; and all the relocations are adjusted based on load location. There are a couple more wrinkles for optimization and extra functionality, but that's approximately it.