Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Chuck Swiger]

On Dec 11, 2006, at 2:27 AM, lveax wrote:
who are the people that works in apple and also a freebsd developer  
now?


Jordan Hubbard and Wilfredo Sanchez come to mind, and maybe Garance  
Drosihn would also qualify, as I think he was part of Apple's darwin- 
developers, IIRC.  There are others.  :-)


--
-Chuck

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Garrett Cooper]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

lveax wrote:
> On 11/6/06, David Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 06:48:28AM -0500, Lonnie Cumberland wrote:
>> > Thanks everyone for the replay to my post as it did finally occur to
>> > me that perhaps this question had been asked on the mailing list, but
>> > unfortunately it occurred to me after I sent it.
>> >
>> > So, basically the Apple team took FreeBSD and the CM micro-kernel,
>> > combined them, made some improvements and added some additional code
>> > and then used it all as the MAC OS X core (without the GUI of course)?
>>
>> Yes, basically. FreeBSD is free for the taking, so Apple took. Steve
>> Jobs' NeXT team had a lot of familiarity with Mach, so they took from
>> there also too. A good number of well known FreeBSD people now work for
>> Apple, there are a number of FreeBSD device drivers shipping with MacOS
>> X. On a lark I put an Intel Etherexpress Pro 10/100B in my G4 Mac and
>> everything simply magically worked. No driver install, nothing.
>>
> 
> 
> who are the people that works in apple and also a freebsd developer now?

There are quite a few, actually, that work for Apple and work on the
FreeBSD project, and vice versa. The other day I was doing some random
websurfing and came across an individual who did a significant amount of
work porting over applications to Darwin for the Apple folks. This is
just one of many devs who works for apple now and contributes back to
the open-source community (note his accomplishments):

- -Garrett
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFfZb66CkrZkzMC68RAjAFAJ0ZByg0YvSjL/COBGJ4CZu5h0x+9ACbBoUu
XZfVwy2BY7LcT4+5S+Qc6cY=
=96BD
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[lveax]

On 11/6/06, David Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 06:48:28AM -0500, Lonnie Cumberland wrote:
> Thanks everyone for the replay to my post as it did finally occur to
> me that perhaps this question had been asked on the mailing list, but
> unfortunately it occurred to me after I sent it.
>
> So, basically the Apple team took FreeBSD and the CM micro-kernel,
> combined them, made some improvements and added some additional code
> and then used it all as the MAC OS X core (without the GUI of course)?

Yes, basically. FreeBSD is free for the taking, so Apple took. Steve
Jobs' NeXT team had a lot of familiarity with Mach, so they took from
there also too. A good number of well known FreeBSD people now work for
Apple, there are a number of FreeBSD device drivers shipping with MacOS
X. On a lark I put an Intel Etherexpress Pro 10/100B in my G4 Mac and
everything simply magically worked. No driver install, nothing.




who are the people that works in apple and also a freebsd developer now?


> With this being said, then does anyone have any experience with the
> stability and performance?

Millions of MacOS X users.

> My guess is that if it is really based upon FreeBSD then the
> performance should be pretty good from my readings about FreeBSD
> compared to other operating systems.

Having both I'd say not. FreeBSD performs better at most server-oriented
tasks than the non-server tuned MacOS X. Have not used MacOS X Server.
Am not familiar with the tuning tweaks in plain old Darwin. Remember the
MacOS/Darwin kernel is greatly different from FreeBSD. Believe it was
McKusik who said to the effect, "The differnce between Linuxes is they
all have the same kernel, everything else is different. The difference
between BSDs is that they all have different kernels, everything else is
the same." Is not exactly true but contains a lot of truth. MacOS
X/Darwin is a recognized BSD variant.

--
David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Garrett Cooper]

David Kelly wrote:

On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 10:56:17PM -0600, Chuck Remes wrote:
  

Also, please recall I said "most software" and not 100% of software.
I am certain there are outliers that don't compile cleanly on OSX,  
but that hardly proves that OSX is not a good UNIX target. The vast  
majority of software compiles and runs just fine on the latest OSX  
release.



Can't say that I find compiling other's applications on MacOS X any
harder than on FreeBSD (without /usr/ports/ assistance). Only
disappointment has been trying to run FreeBSD-hosted X11 apps using
Apple's X11 server. Apple has updated a couple of times since I last
tried so this isn't an entirely fair comparison.
  
   Well, I still don't like the fact that the X11 packaged by Apple is 
XFree 4.8.xx.. Serious improvements and some security issues have been 
addressed since the majority of the XFree86 group moved to X.org.. Yay 
for ports / fink though (depending on what you use), cause you can 
easily upgrade to X.org 6.9 under fink with after a few steps.

-Garrett
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[David Kelly]

On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 10:56:17PM -0600, Chuck Remes wrote:
> 
> Also, please recall I said "most software" and not 100% of software.
> I am certain there are outliers that don't compile cleanly on OSX,  
> but that hardly proves that OSX is not a good UNIX target. The vast  
> majority of software compiles and runs just fine on the latest OSX  
> release.

Can't say that I find compiling other's applications on MacOS X any
harder than on FreeBSD (without /usr/ports/ assistance). Only
disappointment has been trying to run FreeBSD-hosted X11 apps using
Apple's X11 server. Apple has updated a couple of times since I last
tried so this isn't an entirely fair comparison.

-- 
David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Chuck Remes]

On Nov 13, 2006, at 7:02 PM, Lorin Lund wrote:






The biggest problem with MacOS X is that a lot of UNIX software that
runs on FreeBSD and such, is not ported to MacOSX, and it's very
difficult to compile on MacOSX.


This is completely wrong. Take a look at macports [1] (formerly  
darwinports) for a large repository of UNIX software that compiles  
very cleanly on OSX. It's nearly 7 years since OSX shipped to the  
public. In that time, most opensource software was updated to  
compile cleanly on OSX. The primary changes to allow this were to  
the "configure" scripts so they recognize darwin as a base OS. If  
other patches were necessary, most software maintainers accepted  
these patches back into their trunk.


OSX has excellent support for most UNIX software.

cr

[1] macports.org


In trying to compile A+ (see aplusdev.org) I had a few problems  
getting

it compiled
for FreeBSD (Because the A+ code was using the wrong macro to identify
FreeBSD)
But my efforts to compile the latest version for OS X.3 PPC have  
brought

out errors
that look like compiler errors.

In my view porting to the MAC is harder (though I very much wish it  
weren't)


POSIX compliance got much better with the 10.4 (Tiger) release. If  
you are still targeting 10.3 (Panther) then there may be some issues.  
The 10.3 release is over 2 years old now.


Also, please recall I said "most software" and not 100% of software.  
I am certain there are outliers that don't compile cleanly on OSX,  
but that hardly proves that OSX is not a good UNIX target. The vast  
majority of software compiles and runs just fine on the latest OSX  
release.


cr

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

[OT] A+ for Mac (was Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?)

[Garrett Cooper]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Garrett Cooper wrote:
> Lorin Lund wrote:
 The biggest problem with MacOS X is that a lot of UNIX software that
 runs on FreeBSD and such, is not ported to MacOSX, and it's very
 difficult to compile on MacOSX.
>>> This is completely wrong. Take a look at macports [1] (formerly
>>> darwinports) for a large repository of UNIX software that compiles
>>> very cleanly on OSX. It's nearly 7 years since OSX shipped to the
>>> public. In that time, most opensource software was updated to compile
>>> cleanly on OSX. The primary changes to allow this were to the
>>> "configure" scripts so they recognize darwin as a base OS. If other
>>> patches were necessary, most software maintainers accepted these
>>> patches back into their trunk.
>>>
>>> OSX has excellent support for most UNIX software.
>>>
>>> cr
>>>
>>> [1] macports.org
>> In trying to compile A+ (see aplusdev.org) I had a few problems getting
>> it compiled
>> for FreeBSD (Because the A+ code was using the wrong macro to identify
>> FreeBSD)
>> But my efforts to compile the latest version for OS X.3 PPC have brought
>> out errors
>> that look like compiler errors.
> 
>> In my view porting to the MAC is harder (though I very much wish it
>> weren't)
> 
> I'll give porting it a shot. The majority of the stuff I have on my
> iBook is setup with fink, but I'll see if I can give it a go without the
> fink binaries involved..
> -Garrett
> 

You do realize that there is an OSX binary at the 2/3 of the way down
the download page, do you not?
- -Garrett
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFWTB96CkrZkzMC68RAudFAJ953qQojolSRRHHqlgkDAg4rttZOgCeM0IC
Mq3URy3OiVo6VR8KJ9/2nQU=
=qCyj
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Garrett Cooper]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Lorin Lund wrote:
> 
>>
>>> The biggest problem with MacOS X is that a lot of UNIX software that
>>> runs on FreeBSD and such, is not ported to MacOSX, and it's very
>>> difficult to compile on MacOSX.
>>
>> This is completely wrong. Take a look at macports [1] (formerly
>> darwinports) for a large repository of UNIX software that compiles
>> very cleanly on OSX. It's nearly 7 years since OSX shipped to the
>> public. In that time, most opensource software was updated to compile
>> cleanly on OSX. The primary changes to allow this were to the
>> "configure" scripts so they recognize darwin as a base OS. If other
>> patches were necessary, most software maintainers accepted these
>> patches back into their trunk.
>>
>> OSX has excellent support for most UNIX software.
>>
>> cr
>>
>> [1] macports.org
> 
> In trying to compile A+ (see aplusdev.org) I had a few problems getting
> it compiled
> for FreeBSD (Because the A+ code was using the wrong macro to identify
> FreeBSD)
> But my efforts to compile the latest version for OS X.3 PPC have brought
> out errors
> that look like compiler errors.
> 
> In my view porting to the MAC is harder (though I very much wish it
> weren't)

I'll give porting it a shot. The majority of the stuff I have on my
iBook is setup with fink, but I'll see if I can give it a go without the
fink binaries involved..
- -Garrett

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFWSoc6CkrZkzMC68RArXzAJ4qQT6C1OvhZItA5T/+Vsm03qGLOwCeJNVG
FdhRXWf3jvCDB34nKe5OWVc=
=v9Iy
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Lorin Lund]

The biggest problem with MacOS X is that a lot of UNIX software that
runs on FreeBSD and such, is not ported to MacOSX, and it's very
difficult to compile on MacOSX.


This is completely wrong. Take a look at macports [1] (formerly 
darwinports) for a large repository of UNIX software that compiles 
very cleanly on OSX. It's nearly 7 years since OSX shipped to the 
public. In that time, most opensource software was updated to compile 
cleanly on OSX. The primary changes to allow this were to the 
"configure" scripts so they recognize darwin as a base OS. If other 
patches were necessary, most software maintainers accepted these 
patches back into their trunk.


OSX has excellent support for most UNIX software.

cr

[1] macports.org


In trying to compile A+ (see aplusdev.org) I had a few problems getting
it compiled
for FreeBSD (Because the A+ code was using the wrong macro to identify
FreeBSD)
But my efforts to compile the latest version for OS X.3 PPC have brought
out errors
that look like compiler errors.

In my view porting to the MAC is harder (though I very much wish it weren't)


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Garrett Cooper]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Lonnie Cumberland wrote:
> Greetings All,
> 
> I really appreciate all of the feedback and reply posts regaring my
> inquiry about Darwin and FreeBSD.
> 
> I am still somewhat confused as I have been looking at FreeBSD which I
> think is VERY good and have also recently been able to boot up the
> OpenDarwin 7.2.1 as well, but never could get the Darwin 8.1 cdrom to
> install.
> 
> If I follow these messages correctly then it appears that FreeBSD is
> just as good as Darwin although I had expected that the inclusion of
> the CM kernel integrated with the FreeBSD kernel along with various
> other improvements would have made the Darwin software better.
> 
> One thing that I can tell at the moment is that the FreeBSD OS seems
> to have better support for hardware since Darwin (Apple) if very
> specifically targeted to chosen hardware and also they seem to use
> these Carbon libraries for getting things to run which I do not kow
> where to locate more information on them.
> 
> We were looking for a good OS to build from and now know that it will
> not be Linux, but on the BSD side of the house as I like what I have
> seen in both FreeBSD and also what little I have seen in Darwin.
> 
> I would still like to do some more testing to get a better feel for
> what Darwin can offer, but the bottom line is that all of these are
> directly related to FreeBSD and are stable and fast compared to other
> non-FreeBSD related OS's.
> 
> Thanks again and have a good day,
> 
> Lonnie T. Cumberland
> OutStep Technologies Incorporated
> 
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> "Open Source.. opening the doors for the future in the world of
> today"
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, November 13, 2006 08:38, David Kelly wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 01:28:16AM -0800, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>>
>>> No, they used it all as the Darwin core.  Then they took Darwin and
>>>  added their own GUI (used to be called Aqua) and that is MacOSX.
>> X11 also comes on the MacOS X DVD, but is not installed by default.
>>
>>
>>> Bear in mind that the MacOS X gui does not translate directly into
>>> UNIX.  For example, you can load MacOS System 7 files with a
>>> separate resource and data fork onto MacOSX.  The MacOS X gui
>>> handles a lot of this kind of stuff.
>> I lost you there. "So what?" The classic Mac file format is more
>> advanced than a Unix (or Windows) flat file. The MacOS X Unix view of
>> such files is morphed into a directory of files. The GUI turns such
>> directories into a single application icon which *can* be opened to
>> see what is inside but normally a double-click or open launches the
>> app.
>>
>>> Apple also doesen't use the UNIX security model.  As near as I can
>>> tell their core security model is an ACL model not a user/group
>>> model. Once again this is something that's handled elsewhere.
>>>
>> Don't know how its done underneath but from a shell and ported
>> applications it looks exactly the same:
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {767} uname -a Darwin dot-matrix.local 8.8.0 Darwin
>> Kernel Version 8.8.0: Fri Sep  8 17:18:57 PDT 2006;
>> root:xnu-792.12.6.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {768} id uid=503(dkelly) gid=501(dkelly)
>> groups=501(dkelly), 81(appserveradm), 79(appserverusr), 80(admin)
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {769} who am i dkelly   ttyp2Nov 13 08:17
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {770} ls -ld . drwxr-xr-x   33 dkelly  dkelly  1122
>> Nov  1 13:30 .
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {771}
>>
>>> The biggest problem with MacOS X is that a lot of UNIX software
>>> that runs on FreeBSD and such, is not ported to MacOSX, and it's
>>> very difficult to compile on MacOSX.
>> Really? Good thing I didn't know compiling was difficult. The other
>> day I wanted a MacOS X version of mkisofs. Copied cdrtools from
>> /usr/ports/distfiles/ off a FreeBSD machine. Built without a complaint
>>  in moments. Not terribly thrilled with its default install location
>> of /opt/schily/bin/ but at least its easy to remove.
>>
>>
>> --
>> David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> ==
>> ==
>> Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.

Well, when I was in an interview with a Mac lead recently, he was
telling me that there were issues with processor affinity in the Darwin
kernel, meaning that processes/threads would jump from processor to
processor, instead of staying on the same processor. This affects all
machines with multiple processors (be they virtual or physical) from
what I understand, and it does generate a lot more relative delay in
multithreaded code as the amount of time it takes to fully change
processor state is higher moving from one processor to another, when you
have to move cached memory back and forth down the memory model, etc.
Sad, but it's one of the current problems with the implementation of
the mach kernel-Darwin-over a monolithic kernel like Free

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Lonnie Cumberland]

David Kelly wrote:


On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 09:03:20AM -0600, Lonnie Cumberland wrote:
 


I am still somewhat confused as I have been looking at FreeBSD which I
think is VERY good and have also recently been able to boot up the
OpenDarwin 7.2.1 as well, but never could get the Darwin 8.1 cdrom to
install.
   



If your desire is to purchase a commercially supported server then an
Apple Xserve would be hard to beat. I think you misunderstand the
purpose of Darwin and would be better served with FreeBSD.
 

No, mostly we were just trying to look at the state of current 
OpneSource OS's to try and get a feel for the advantages and 
disadvantages of each type.


Also, not to be brash, but if I am missing the point of Darwin as you 
say, then please help to clarify this for me as it is the fundamental 
reason for this whole thread and I would really like to know what the 
purpose are so that we can make informed judgments on FreeBSD and Darwin..



If I follow these messages correctly then it appears that FreeBSD is
just as good as Darwin although I had expected that the inclusion of
the CM kernel integrated with the FreeBSD kernel along with various
other improvements would have made the Darwin software better.
   



I think you are spending too much time keeping score on minute details
and not enough time on the big picture.
 

Not really trying to keep score but again looking for the strengths and 
weaknesses of FreeBSD vs Darwin



I would still like to do some more testing to get a better feel for
what Darwin can offer, but the bottom line is that all of these are
directly related to FreeBSD and are stable and fast compared to other
non-FreeBSD related OS's.
   



Testing: good idea.
 


This is always a good idea when evaluating technologies I think.


Speed: the slowest machine is one that is down.

Top-posting: Frowned upon among traditional technical communities.
You'll get more out of these communities if you learn how to trim
replies and insert your comments in the appropriate places.
 

thanks for correcting my accepted behavior on the mailing list and I 
will try to improve in future posts.


Thanks and have a good day,

Lonnie T. Cumberland
OutStep Technologies Incorporated

Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 


"Open Source.. opening the doors for the future in the world of today"

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Doug Hardie]

On Nov 13, 2006, at 01:28, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:


Apple also doesen't use the UNIX security model.  As near as I can
tell their core security model is an ACL model not a user/group model.
Once again this is something that's handled elsewhere.



The user-group security model is alive and the heart of OS-X  
security.  It is used throughout the system even within the user's  
home directory where there are files the user cannot access.  This  
causes problems for backup progrms that want to be run by the user  
with a window interface as they can't backup those files.  ACLs are  
available but not used by default.  The user has to create them if  
desired.  There used to be a FreeBSD project to add ACLs but I don't  
know its status.  i suspect the two implementations will be very  
similar.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[David Kelly]

On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 09:03:20AM -0600, Lonnie Cumberland wrote:
> 
> I am still somewhat confused as I have been looking at FreeBSD which I
> think is VERY good and have also recently been able to boot up the
> OpenDarwin 7.2.1 as well, but never could get the Darwin 8.1 cdrom to
> install.

If your desire is to purchase a commercially supported server then an
Apple Xserve would be hard to beat. I think you misunderstand the
purpose of Darwin and would be better served with FreeBSD.

> If I follow these messages correctly then it appears that FreeBSD is
> just as good as Darwin although I had expected that the inclusion of
> the CM kernel integrated with the FreeBSD kernel along with various
> other improvements would have made the Darwin software better.

I think you are spending too much time keeping score on minute details
and not enough time on the big picture.

> One thing that I can tell at the moment is that the FreeBSD OS seems
> to have better support for hardware since Darwin (Apple) if very
> specifically targeted to chosen hardware and also they seem to use
> these Carbon libraries for getting things to run which I do not kow
> where to locate more information on them.

No, Carbon has almost nothing to do with Darwin. Carbon is the API which
runs on top of Darwin (not a part of). Aqua is implemented in Carbon,
Carbon runs on top of Darwin. Carbon is not a part of Darwin.

> I would still like to do some more testing to get a better feel for
> what Darwin can offer, but the bottom line is that all of these are
> directly related to FreeBSD and are stable and fast compared to other
> non-FreeBSD related OS's.

Testing: good idea.

Speed: the slowest machine is one that is down.

Top-posting: Frowned upon among traditional technical communities.
You'll get more out of these communities if you learn how to trim
replies and insert your comments in the appropriate places.

-- 
David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Lonnie Cumberland]

Greetings All,

I really appreciate all of the feedback and reply posts regaring my
inquiry about Darwin and FreeBSD.

I am still somewhat confused as I have been looking at FreeBSD which I
think is VERY good and have also recently been able to boot up the
OpenDarwin 7.2.1 as well, but never could get the Darwin 8.1 cdrom to
install.

If I follow these messages correctly then it appears that FreeBSD is
just as good as Darwin although I had expected that the inclusion of
the CM kernel integrated with the FreeBSD kernel along with various
other improvements would have made the Darwin software better.

One thing that I can tell at the moment is that the FreeBSD OS seems
to have better support for hardware since Darwin (Apple) if very
specifically targeted to chosen hardware and also they seem to use
these Carbon libraries for getting things to run which I do not kow
where to locate more information on them.

We were looking for a good OS to build from and now know that it will
not be Linux, but on the BSD side of the house as I like what I have
seen in both FreeBSD and also what little I have seen in Darwin.

I would still like to do some more testing to get a better feel for
what Darwin can offer, but the bottom line is that all of these are
directly related to FreeBSD and are stable and fast compared to other
non-FreeBSD related OS's.

Thanks again and have a good day,

Lonnie T. Cumberland
OutStep Technologies Incorporated

Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

"Open Source.. opening the doors for the future in the world of
today"



On Mon, November 13, 2006 08:38, David Kelly wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 01:28:16AM -0800, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>
>>
>> No, they used it all as the Darwin core.  Then they took Darwin and
>>  added their own GUI (used to be called Aqua) and that is MacOSX.
>
> X11 also comes on the MacOS X DVD, but is not installed by default.
>
>
>> Bear in mind that the MacOS X gui does not translate directly into
>> UNIX.  For example, you can load MacOS System 7 files with a
>> separate resource and data fork onto MacOSX.  The MacOS X gui
>> handles a lot of this kind of stuff.
>
> I lost you there. "So what?" The classic Mac file format is more
> advanced than a Unix (or Windows) flat file. The MacOS X Unix view of
> such files is morphed into a directory of files. The GUI turns such
> directories into a single application icon which *can* be opened to
> see what is inside but normally a double-click or open launches the
> app.
>
>> Apple also doesen't use the UNIX security model.  As near as I can
>> tell their core security model is an ACL model not a user/group
>> model. Once again this is something that's handled elsewhere.
>>
>
> Don't know how its done underneath but from a shell and ported
> applications it looks exactly the same:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {767} uname -a Darwin dot-matrix.local 8.8.0 Darwin
> Kernel Version 8.8.0: Fri Sep  8 17:18:57 PDT 2006;
> root:xnu-792.12.6.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {768} id uid=503(dkelly) gid=501(dkelly)
> groups=501(dkelly), 81(appserveradm), 79(appserverusr), 80(admin)
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {769} who am i dkelly   ttyp2Nov 13 08:17
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {770} ls -ld . drwxr-xr-x   33 dkelly  dkelly  1122
> Nov  1 13:30 .
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {771}
>
>> The biggest problem with MacOS X is that a lot of UNIX software
>> that runs on FreeBSD and such, is not ported to MacOSX, and it's
>> very difficult to compile on MacOSX.
>
> Really? Good thing I didn't know compiling was difficult. The other
> day I wanted a MacOS X version of mkisofs. Copied cdrtools from
> /usr/ports/distfiles/ off a FreeBSD machine. Built without a complaint
>  in moments. Not terribly thrilled with its default install location
> of /opt/schily/bin/ but at least its easy to remove.
>
>
> --
> David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ==
> ==
> Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
>
>


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[David Kelly]

On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 01:28:16AM -0800, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>
> No, they used it all as the Darwin core.  Then they took Darwin and
> added their own GUI (used to be called Aqua) and that is MacOSX.

X11 also comes on the MacOS X DVD, but is not installed by default.

> Bear in mind that the MacOS X gui does not translate directly into
> UNIX.  For example, you can load MacOS System 7 files with a separate
> resource and data fork onto MacOSX.  The MacOS X gui handles a lot of
> this kind of stuff.

I lost you there. "So what?" The classic Mac file format is more
advanced than a Unix (or Windows) flat file. The MacOS X Unix view of
such files is morphed into a directory of files. The GUI turns such
directories into a single application icon which *can* be opened to see
what is inside but normally a double-click or open launches the app.

> Apple also doesen't use the UNIX security model.  As near as I can
> tell their core security model is an ACL model not a user/group model.
> Once again this is something that's handled elsewhere.

Don't know how its done underneath but from a shell and ported
applications it looks exactly the same:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] {767} uname -a
Darwin dot-matrix.local 8.8.0 Darwin Kernel Version 8.8.0: Fri Sep  8 17:18:57 
PDT 2006; root:xnu-792.12.6.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc
[EMAIL PROTECTED] {768} id
uid=503(dkelly) gid=501(dkelly) groups=501(dkelly), 81(appserveradm), 
79(appserverusr), 80(admin)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] {769} who am i
dkelly   ttyp2Nov 13 08:17 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] {770} ls -ld .
drwxr-xr-x   33 dkelly  dkelly  1122 Nov  1 13:30 .
[EMAIL PROTECTED] {771} 

> The biggest problem with MacOS X is that a lot of UNIX software that
> runs on FreeBSD and such, is not ported to MacOSX, and it's very
> difficult to compile on MacOSX.

Really? Good thing I didn't know compiling was difficult. The other day
I wanted a MacOS X version of mkisofs. Copied cdrtools from
/usr/ports/distfiles/ off a FreeBSD machine. Built without a complaint
in moments. Not terribly thrilled with its default install location of
/opt/schily/bin/ but at least its easy to remove.

-- 
David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[cremes . devlist]

Ted, you got a couple of things wrong. Read below for the corrections.

On Nov 13, 2006, at 3:28 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:



- Original Message -
From: "Lonnie Cumberland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Garrett Cooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: 
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 3:48 AM
Subject: Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?


Thanks everyone for the replay to my post as it did finally occur  
to me

that perhaps this question had been asked on the mailing list, but
unfortunately it occurred to me after I sent it.

So, basically the Apple team took FreeBSD and the CM micro-kernel,
combined them, made some improvements and added some additional  
code and

then used it all as the MAC OS X core (without the GUI of course)?



No, they used it all as the Darwin core.  Then they took Darwin and  
added

their own GUI (used to be called Aqua) and that is MacOSX.

Bear in mind that the MacOS X gui does not translate directly into  
UNIX.

For example, you can load MacOS System 7 files with a separate
resource and data fork onto MacOSX.  The MacOS X gui handles a lot
of this kind of stuff.


No, the GUI has very little to do with the ability to run legacy  
System 9 (and prior) binaries. Some of these older binaries which  
were never updated to use the newer Carbon libraries run inside a  
virtual machine called the Blue Box. Many of these older apps that  
were updated to conform to the new Carbon libraries (primarily Carbon  
eliminated non-reentrant code and put in setter/getters for global  
vars) run "natively" under the darwin kernel.


OSX also has a POSIX-compliant API so almost all "UNIX" software  
compiles and runs cleanly on OSX (more on this below).


Lastly, OSX has the Cocoa API which is what most new OSX software  
targets. Cocoa is the new name for the old NeXT OpenStep API.


So, darwin supports POSIX semantics, the Carbon API, and the Cocoa API.


Apple also doesen't use the UNIX security model.  As near as I can
tell their core security model is an ACL model not a user/group model.
Once again this is something that's handled elsewhere.


Not quite. GUI applications owned by root with the setuid bit set are  
properly recognized by the GUI as "special" and will request password  
authorization from the user. Many applications can be run from the  
command line (even if they have GUI components) which will respect  
the UNIX filesystem permissions. If you go inside an application  
bundle (a directory containing all code and resources for an  
application) and change the permissions on the binary to something  
non-executable, the GUI cannot launch it.


As of the latest OSX release (10.4, Tiger) Apple added quite a bit of  
support for ACL security semantics. This is relatively new.



With this being said, then does anyone have any experience with the
stability and performance?

My guess is that if it is really based upon FreeBSD then the  
performance
should be pretty good from my readings about FreeBSD compared to  
other

operating systems.



Mac OS X is easily more stable than FreeBSD simply because it can
only be run on specific hardware that Apple sells.  As a result the
developers always know exactly what their enviornment is going to
be like.  As for performance, what performance metric are you  
looking at?


While OSX is stable for the reason you cite, I wouldn't say it is  
MORE stable than FreeBSD 4.x. It probably is as stable or moreso than  
some of the more recent FreeBSD releases but that seems to be more  
related to recent poor testing and QA practices than hardware support  
problems.



The biggest problem with MacOS X is that a lot of UNIX software that
runs on FreeBSD and such, is not ported to MacOSX, and it's very
difficult to compile on MacOSX.


This is completely wrong. Take a look at macports [1] (formerly  
darwinports) for a large repository of UNIX software that compiles  
very cleanly on OSX. It's nearly 7 years since OSX shipped to the  
public. In that time, most opensource software was updated to compile  
cleanly on OSX. The primary changes to allow this were to the  
"configure" scripts so they recognize darwin as a base OS. If other  
patches were necessary, most software maintainers accepted these  
patches back into their trunk.


OSX has excellent support for most UNIX software.

cr

[1] macports.org
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

- Original Message - 
From: "Lonnie Cumberland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Garrett Cooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: 
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 3:48 AM
Subject: Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?


> Thanks everyone for the replay to my post as it did finally occur to me
> that perhaps this question had been asked on the mailing list, but
> unfortunately it occurred to me after I sent it.
>
> So, basically the Apple team took FreeBSD and the CM micro-kernel,
> combined them, made some improvements and added some additional code and
> then used it all as the MAC OS X core (without the GUI of course)?
>

No, they used it all as the Darwin core.  Then they took Darwin and added
their own GUI (used to be called Aqua) and that is MacOSX.

Bear in mind that the MacOS X gui does not translate directly into UNIX.
For example, you can load MacOS System 7 files with a separate
resource and data fork onto MacOSX.  The MacOS X gui handles a lot
of this kind of stuff.

Apple also doesen't use the UNIX security model.  As near as I can
tell their core security model is an ACL model not a user/group model.
Once again this is something that's handled elsewhere.

> With this being said, then does anyone have any experience with the
> stability and performance?
>
> My guess is that if it is really based upon FreeBSD then the performance
> should be pretty good from my readings about FreeBSD compared to other
> operating systems.
>

Mac OS X is easily more stable than FreeBSD simply because it can
only be run on specific hardware that Apple sells.  As a result the
developers always know exactly what their enviornment is going to
be like.  As for performance, what performance metric are you looking at?

The biggest problem with MacOS X is that a lot of UNIX software that
runs on FreeBSD and such, is not ported to MacOSX, and it's very
difficult to compile on MacOSX.

Ted

> Thanks again to everyone,
> Cheers,
> Lonnie
>
> Garrett Cooper wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Lorin Lund wrote:
> >
> >> Lonnie Cumberland wrote:
> >>
> >>> Greetings All,
> >>>
> >>> Being a long time Linux user and now looking into moving over to
> >>> FreeBSD, I decided to so some research on the web to try and get a
> >>> better idea as to the strengths and weaknesses as compared to other
> >>> operating systems like Linux (Fedora, Gentoo, etc..), OpenBSD, NetBSD,
> >>> and Opensolaris.
> >>>
> >>> From what I have found, FreeBSD seems to be at the very top in almost
> >>> every way.
> >>>
> >>> In my Internet travels, I came across a site that has this MAC OS X (
> >>> which I guess is called Darwin?) at:
> >>>
> >>> http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html
> >>>
> >>> and have noticed that they seem to have built the MAC OS X from a core
> >>> of FreeBSD 5.x.
> >>> Do I read this correctly?
> >>> Also, what are the differences between MAC OS X and Darwin?
> >>>
> >> I'm pretty sure that Darwin does not include the MAC gui.  I believe
> >> that the guis
> >> used on Darwin are basically the same as found on *BSD and Linux - KDE,
> >> Gnome, ...
> >>
> >
> > Darwin is the core to the OS; it doesn't contain a GUI, unless installed
> > from ports. Quartz is the "GUI platform" for OSX.
> > - -Garrett
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
> > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> >
> > iD8DBQFFTr7s6CkrZkzMC68RAhAmAJ97ceqgoCvP8vZAh1IFq1qQyt7trgCfXe+w
> > 8SWtLI36Fbx7mFyMGbbs7W8=
> > =EgRZ
> > -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> > ___
> > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> >
>
> -- 
> Thanks and have a good day,
> Lonnie T. Cumberland
> OutStep Technologies Incorporated
> Tel: 866-425-7010
>
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Recommended sites:
>
>http://www.peoplesquest.com
>
> ___
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Eric Schuele]

On 11/06/2006 05:48, Lonnie Cumberland wrote:
Thanks everyone for the replay to my post as it did finally occur to me 
that perhaps this question had been asked on the mailing list, but 
unfortunately it occurred to me after I sent it.


So, basically the Apple team took FreeBSD and the CM micro-kernel, 
combined them, made some improvements and added some additional code and 
then used it all as the MAC OS X core (without the GUI of course)?


A little bit of info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XNU

I'll let others comment on its correctness.



With this being said, then does anyone have any experience with the 
stability and performance?


My guess is that if it is really based upon FreeBSD then the performance 
should be pretty good from my readings about FreeBSD compared to other 
operating systems.


Thanks again to everyone,
Cheers,
Lonnie

Garrett Cooper wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Lorin Lund wrote:
 

Lonnie Cumberland wrote:
   

Greetings All,

Being a long time Linux user and now looking into moving over to
FreeBSD, I decided to so some research on the web to try and get a
better idea as to the strengths and weaknesses as compared to other
operating systems like Linux (Fedora, Gentoo, etc..), OpenBSD, NetBSD,
and Opensolaris.

From what I have found, FreeBSD seems to be at the very top in almost
every way.

In my Internet travels, I came across a site that has this MAC OS X (
which I guess is called Darwin?) at:

http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html

and have noticed that they seem to have built the MAC OS X from a core
of FreeBSD 5.x.
Do I read this correctly?
Also, what are the differences between MAC OS X and Darwin?
  

I'm pretty sure that Darwin does not include the MAC gui.  I believe
that the guis
used on Darwin are basically the same as found on *BSD and Linux - KDE,
Gnome, ...



Darwin is the core to the OS; it doesn't contain a GUI, unless installed
from ports. Quartz is the "GUI platform" for OSX.
- -Garrett
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFTr7s6CkrZkzMC68RAhAmAJ97ceqgoCvP8vZAh1IFq1qQyt7trgCfXe+w
8SWtLI36Fbx7mFyMGbbs7W8=
=EgRZ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to 
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
  





--
Regards,
Eric
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Garrett Cooper]

On Nov 6, 2006, at 3:48 AM, Lonnie Cumberland wrote:

Thanks everyone for the replay to my post as it did finally occur  
to me that perhaps this question had been asked on the mailing  
list, but unfortunately it occurred to me after I sent it.


So, basically the Apple team took FreeBSD and the CM micro-kernel,  
combined them, made some improvements and added some additional  
code and then used it all as the MAC OS X core (without the GUI of  
course)?


As others have discussed, the Apple devs took the FreeBSD userland  
and CM micro-kernel, combined them, provided quite a few bug fixes  
via debugging, and have continued to work with the BSD community in  
an effort to better support many things in BSD, some being Apple  
hardwire, others being Apple "endorsed" technologies (firewire,  
bluetooth, USB, etc).


With this being said, then does anyone have any experience with the  
stability and performance?


Yes, millions of users as David Kelley said, and I personally must  
say that OSX is a solid OS for user applications. That is based not  
only on the fact that Apple develops alongside the opensource/BSD  
community and that the majority of their applications are developed  
in-house, but it is also because Apple works with limited vendors and  
hardware, and tests the heck out of their systems before releasing  
them onto market. So, they control the ubiquity of their products in  
a sense and can guarantee a higher level of service in most cases.


My guess is that if it is really based upon FreeBSD then the  
performance should be pretty good from my readings about FreeBSD  
compared to other operating systems.


Again though, FreeBSD is a solid platform and it is well developed,  
based upon its completeness and design, user community, and developer  
community, when compared to many other OSes.



Thanks again to everyone,
Cheers,
Lonnie


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[David Kelly]

On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 10:41:28AM -0500, Robert Huff wrote:
> 
> David Kelly writes:
> 
> >  Yes, basically. FreeBSD is free for the taking, so Apple
> >  took. Steve Jobs' NeXT team had a lot of familiarity with Mach,
> >  so they took from there also too. A good number of well known
> >  FreeBSD people now work for Apple, there are a number of FreeBSD
> >  device drivers shipping with MacOS X.
> 
>   In the interest of perspective, it's worth noting this has not
> be a one-sided arrangement.  Apple has contributed substantial
> debugging info and even blocks of code - often for the kind of
> boring/unglamorous stuff which doesn't get a lot of attention in
> mostly volunteer project.

Yes! Thanks for bringing that up. I particularly remember Apple's work
on NFS.

-- 
David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Robert Huff]

David Kelly writes:

>  Yes, basically. FreeBSD is free for the taking, so Apple
>  took. Steve Jobs' NeXT team had a lot of familiarity with Mach,
>  so they took from there also too. A good number of well known
>  FreeBSD people now work for Apple, there are a number of FreeBSD
>  device drivers shipping with MacOS X.

In the interest of perspective, it's worth noting this has not
be a one-sided arrangement.  Apple has contributed substantial
debugging info and even blocks of code - often for the kind of
boring/unglamorous stuff which doesn't get a lot of attention in
mostly volunteer project.


Robert Huff
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[David Kelly]

On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 06:48:28AM -0500, Lonnie Cumberland wrote:
> Thanks everyone for the replay to my post as it did finally occur to
> me that perhaps this question had been asked on the mailing list, but
> unfortunately it occurred to me after I sent it.
> 
> So, basically the Apple team took FreeBSD and the CM micro-kernel,
> combined them, made some improvements and added some additional code
> and then used it all as the MAC OS X core (without the GUI of course)?

Yes, basically. FreeBSD is free for the taking, so Apple took. Steve
Jobs' NeXT team had a lot of familiarity with Mach, so they took from
there also too. A good number of well known FreeBSD people now work for
Apple, there are a number of FreeBSD device drivers shipping with MacOS
X. On a lark I put an Intel Etherexpress Pro 10/100B in my G4 Mac and
everything simply magically worked. No driver install, nothing.

> With this being said, then does anyone have any experience with the 
> stability and performance?

Millions of MacOS X users.

> My guess is that if it is really based upon FreeBSD then the
> performance should be pretty good from my readings about FreeBSD
> compared to other operating systems.

Having both I'd say not. FreeBSD performs better at most server-oriented
tasks than the non-server tuned MacOS X. Have not used MacOS X Server.
Am not familiar with the tuning tweaks in plain old Darwin. Remember the
MacOS/Darwin kernel is greatly different from FreeBSD. Believe it was
McKusik who said to the effect, "The differnce between Linuxes is they
all have the same kernel, everything else is different. The difference
between BSDs is that they all have different kernels, everything else is
the same." Is not exactly true but contains a lot of truth. MacOS
X/Darwin is a recognized BSD variant.

-- 
David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Lonnie Cumberland]

Thanks everyone for the replay to my post as it did finally occur to me 
that perhaps this question had been asked on the mailing list, but 
unfortunately it occurred to me after I sent it.


So, basically the Apple team took FreeBSD and the CM micro-kernel, 
combined them, made some improvements and added some additional code and 
then used it all as the MAC OS X core (without the GUI of course)?


With this being said, then does anyone have any experience with the 
stability and performance?


My guess is that if it is really based upon FreeBSD then the performance 
should be pretty good from my readings about FreeBSD compared to other 
operating systems.


Thanks again to everyone,
Cheers,
Lonnie

Garrett Cooper wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Lorin Lund wrote:
  

Lonnie Cumberland wrote:


Greetings All,

Being a long time Linux user and now looking into moving over to
FreeBSD, I decided to so some research on the web to try and get a
better idea as to the strengths and weaknesses as compared to other
operating systems like Linux (Fedora, Gentoo, etc..), OpenBSD, NetBSD,
and Opensolaris.

From what I have found, FreeBSD seems to be at the very top in almost
every way.

In my Internet travels, I came across a site that has this MAC OS X (
which I guess is called Darwin?) at:

http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html

and have noticed that they seem to have built the MAC OS X from a core
of FreeBSD 5.x.
Do I read this correctly?
Also, what are the differences between MAC OS X and Darwin?
  

I'm pretty sure that Darwin does not include the MAC gui.  I believe
that the guis
used on Darwin are basically the same as found on *BSD and Linux - KDE,
Gnome, ...



Darwin is the core to the OS; it doesn't contain a GUI, unless installed
from ports. Quartz is the "GUI platform" for OSX.
- -Garrett
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFTr7s6CkrZkzMC68RAhAmAJ97ceqgoCvP8vZAh1IFq1qQyt7trgCfXe+w
8SWtLI36Fbx7mFyMGbbs7W8=
=EgRZ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
  


--
Thanks and have a good day,
Lonnie T. Cumberland
OutStep Technologies Incorporated
Tel: 866-425-7010

Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Recommended sites:

  http://www.peoplesquest.com

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Garrett Cooper]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Lorin Lund wrote:
> Lonnie Cumberland wrote:
>> Greetings All,
>>
>> Being a long time Linux user and now looking into moving over to
>> FreeBSD, I decided to so some research on the web to try and get a
>> better idea as to the strengths and weaknesses as compared to other
>> operating systems like Linux (Fedora, Gentoo, etc..), OpenBSD, NetBSD,
>> and Opensolaris.
>>
>> From what I have found, FreeBSD seems to be at the very top in almost
>> every way.
>>
>> In my Internet travels, I came across a site that has this MAC OS X (
>> which I guess is called Darwin?) at:
>>
>> http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html
>>
>> and have noticed that they seem to have built the MAC OS X from a core
>> of FreeBSD 5.x.
>> Do I read this correctly?
>> Also, what are the differences between MAC OS X and Darwin?
> I'm pretty sure that Darwin does not include the MAC gui.  I believe
> that the guis
> used on Darwin are basically the same as found on *BSD and Linux - KDE,
> Gnome, ...

Darwin is the core to the OS; it doesn't contain a GUI, unless installed
from ports. Quartz is the "GUI platform" for OSX.
- -Garrett
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFTr7s6CkrZkzMC68RAhAmAJ97ceqgoCvP8vZAh1IFq1qQyt7trgCfXe+w
8SWtLI36Fbx7mFyMGbbs7W8=
=EgRZ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Lorin Lund]

Lonnie Cumberland wrote:

Greetings All,

Being a long time Linux user and now looking into moving over to 
FreeBSD, I decided to so some research on the web to try and get a 
better idea as to the strengths and weaknesses as compared to other 
operating systems like Linux (Fedora, Gentoo, etc..), OpenBSD, NetBSD, 
and Opensolaris.


From what I have found, FreeBSD seems to be at the very top in almost 
every way.


In my Internet travels, I came across a site that has this MAC OS X ( 
which I guess is called Darwin?) at:


http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html

and have noticed that they seem to have built the MAC OS X from a core 
of FreeBSD 5.x.

Do I read this correctly?
Also, what are the differences between MAC OS X and Darwin?
I'm pretty sure that Darwin does not include the MAC gui.  I believe 
that the guis
used on Darwin are basically the same as found on *BSD and Linux - KDE, 
Gnome, ...


The reason that I ask all of this stuff is because if we were going to 
take a distro to start building from as a base for a project that we 
are working on then would it make more sense to take the latest 
FreeBSD 6.1 or the MAC OS X (Darwin) as the base since there has been 
a great amount of work on both distros and they are also both BSD based?


I guess that I am still a little confused on some of these things and 
hope that some one can help to answer some of my newbie questions.


Thanks and have a good day,
Lonnie T. Cumberland
OutStep Technologies Incorporated
Tel: 866-425-7010

Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Recommended sites:

  http://www.peoplesquest.com

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to 
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"





___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Garrett Cooper]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Lonnie Cumberland wrote:
> Greetings All,
> 
> Being a long time Linux user and now looking into moving over to
> FreeBSD, I decided to so some research on the web to try and get a
> better idea as to the strengths and weaknesses as compared to other
> operating systems like Linux (Fedora, Gentoo, etc..), OpenBSD, NetBSD,
> and Opensolaris.
> 
> From what I have found, FreeBSD seems to be at the very top in almost
> every way.
> 
> In my Internet travels, I came across a site that has this MAC OS X (
> which I guess is called Darwin?) at:
> 
> http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html
> 
> and have noticed that they seem to have built the MAC OS X from a core
> of FreeBSD 5.x.
> Do I read this correctly?
> Also, what are the differences between MAC OS X and Darwin?
> 
> The reason that I ask all of this stuff is because if we were going to
> take a distro to start building from as a base for a project that we are
> working on then would it make more sense to take the latest FreeBSD 6.1
> or the MAC OS X (Darwin) as the base since there has been a great amount
> of work on both distros and they are also both BSD based?
> 
> I guess that I am still a little confused on some of these things and
> hope that some one can help to answer some of my newbie questions.
> 
> Thanks and have a good day,
> Lonnie T. Cumberland
> OutStep Technologies Incorporated
> Tel: 866-425-7010
> 
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Recommended sites:
> 
>   http://www.peoplesquest.com

This has been mentioned quite a few times on this list.
The kernel is a Mach kernel, conceptualized by a professor and
his research group out at Carnegie Melon some years back (I want to say
7-8 years), and the userland for the OSX operating system is FreeBSD based.
Hunting around Wikipedia a bit will most likely facilitate any
answers you may have about Mach (and micro) kernels, OSX, and FreeBSD.
- -Garrett
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFTrS06CkrZkzMC68RAgZlAJ96y+eYkxMMzGXmz+4Xoag6/WAp2gCfbOPX
04OlE9BZZ+/7T4BEwK5bt0I=
=qa+L
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

MAC OS X connection to FreeBSD?

[Lonnie Cumberland]

Greetings All,

Being a long time Linux user and now looking into moving over to 
FreeBSD, I decided to so some research on the web to try and get a 
better idea as to the strengths and weaknesses as compared to other 
operating systems like Linux (Fedora, Gentoo, etc..), OpenBSD, NetBSD, 
and Opensolaris.


From what I have found, FreeBSD seems to be at the very top in almost 
every way.


In my Internet travels, I came across a site that has this MAC OS X ( 
which I guess is called Darwin?) at:


http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html

and have noticed that they seem to have built the MAC OS X from a core 
of FreeBSD 5.x. 

Do I read this correctly? 


Also, what are the differences between MAC OS X and Darwin?

The reason that I ask all of this stuff is because if we were going to 
take a distro to start building from as a base for a project that we are 
working on then would it make more sense to take the latest FreeBSD 6.1 
or the MAC OS X (Darwin) as the base since there has been a great amount 
of work on both distros and they are also both BSD based?


I guess that I am still a little confused on some of these things and 
hope that some one can help to answer some of my newbie questions.


Thanks and have a good day,
Lonnie T. Cumberland
OutStep Technologies Incorporated
Tel: 866-425-7010

Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Recommended sites:

  http://www.peoplesquest.com

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"