On 27 Oct 2014, at 21:04, Asiga Nael <[email protected]> wrote: > Btw, nobody suggested Darwin. It's open-source,
Well, kind of. The audio subsystem, for example, is proprietary, so if you want to have working sound then you're going to need to write a load of kernel code. I'm also not sure if anyone's ported DRM, so if you want to have working 3D drivers with X.org on Darwin you'll need a fair bit of work there. Or you could just use FreeBSD. > and AFAIK it supports fat binaries natively (I don't think fat binaries are > an OSX addition, they must be in Darwin already). Fat binaries are not that hard to support. Mach-O has a well-specified way of supporting them, but there's a proposal for adding them to ELF. You need a little bit of support in the kernel's image activator and a bit in the runtime linker (for shared library fat binaries), but not very much. > Maybe it can even mount DMGs natively (I don't know if DMG are a Darwin or an > OSX thing). What is it about DMGs that you actually want? Disk images are not hard to support and the bundle format on OS X is only required to work around limitations in the filesystem. With ZFS, it just looks like an ugly hack. > Regarding app bundles, that's a desktop thing, not an OS thing, so that can > be done from GNUstep. Well, kind of. To really do it properly, you also want framework bundles, and that requires some rtld patching to allow looking for libraries in the correct place (not just lib/*.so, but following the symlinks inside the framework bundles). GNUstep implements framework bundles in a fairly hacky way. > So, I tend to believe Darwin with GNUstep would have every feature I wish to > have in my everyday OS. Unless you want your everyday OS to have accelerated video or working audio. Or WiFi... David -- Sent from my Apple II _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
