×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Darling: Run Apple OS X Binaries On Linux

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the sure-thing-sweetheart dept.

OS X 255

An anonymous reader writes "After having Wine to run Windows binaries on Linux, there is now the Darling Project that allows users to run unmodified Apple OS X binaries on Linux. The project builds upon GNUstep and has built the various frameworks/libraries to be binary compatible with OSX/Darwin. The project is still being worked on as part of an academic thesis but is already running basic OS X programs."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Does it run PPC binaries? (0, Troll)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#42229153)

no? damn

Re:Does it run PPC binaries? (2, Interesting)

KiloByte (825081) | about 2 years ago | (#42229193)

apt-get install qemu

I have a hunch Darling would need some extra beating, but it's no different from wine on ARM.

Re:Does it run PPC binaries? (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 2 years ago | (#42229263)

Remember SheepShaver [cebix.net] , and the like in PPC days?

With Intel as a common denominator since 05, I was always wondering why GNUStep hooks to run Cocoa apps weren't being developed.

Well, now I guess they are. I wish it'd have been done, back when I tinkered more. :-)

Re:Does it run PPC binaries? (5, Informative)

LubosD (909058) | about 2 years ago | (#42229483)

(I am the author of Darling.) And you're correct. Supporting PPC is on my TODO list and will not be that difficult I'll just have to port the few assembly routines.

Re:Does it run PPC binaries? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42230115)

Does this mean I'll be able to run my old OS X stuff like Photoshop Elements 2.0 and my old games like Aliens Vs Predator and Sacrifice? They where the only reason I kept my old Mac tower running for so long, but the mobo seems to be flaking now...

Re:Does it run PPC binaries? (2, Informative)

Macrat (638047) | about 2 years ago | (#42230125)

I would be a lot easier to just buy a used PPC Mac mini.

Re:Does it run PPC binaries? (5, Funny)

perpenso (1613749) | about 2 years ago | (#42229367)

no? damn

Well, neither does the current Mac OS X. So it is fully compatible in that regard.

Re:Does it run PPC binaries? (4, Informative)

paugq (443696) | about 2 years ago | (#42229389)

There's Mac-on-Linux for that, last updated in 2007:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac-on-Linux [wikipedia.org]

Re:Does it run PPC binaries? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229973)

"Last updated in 2007" as far as Linux binary-only programs go usually means "doesn't work in any current Linux distro except maybe Debian," so I'm guessing people need better solutions.

I like the icon. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42230093)

But it's not the same thing. This is running OS X binaries, without OS X.

Re:Does it run PPC binaries? (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about 2 years ago | (#42229433)

It probably would on PPC Linux...

wine (1, Redundant)

johnsnails (1715452) | about 2 years ago | (#42229155)

Nothing to wine about here!

Re:wine (1, Interesting)

hcs_$reboot (1536101) | about 2 years ago | (#42229833)

Actually... I hope the best for Darling - i.e. not the same future as Wine. Since 1993 the Wine team struggles to get Windows programs running on Linux, and after almost 20 years it's still a pita to have most of the win applis evolving smoothly under Wine. Not sure if it's MS fault, but we're still there, in 2012.

Re:wine (3)

thebigmacd (545973) | about 2 years ago | (#42230233)

You sure about this? You can run even the latest and greatest Windows versions of Steam games via playonlinux, which is basically a wrapper for WINE. Things have improved greatly in the last year or two.

Re:wine (-1, Troll)

Goodyob (2445598) | about 2 years ago | (#42230323)

You can run even the latest and greatest Windows versions of Steam games via playonlinux

Enjoy your one frame per second!

Debunking Wine Myths (5, Informative)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42230371)

Enjoy your one frame per second!

I believe in proper ports, using cross-platform tools. In fact with Windows is becoming just another platform. Its simply less of an issue, but to suggest Wine is slower when its often faster is really strange.

http://wiki.winehq.org/Debunking_Wine_Myths [winehq.org]

I've given you a link to show how misinformed you are. I suggest you spend a little time getting informed

Re:wine (4, Informative)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#42230331)

Wine is working great these days. Steam, video games and even Netflix.

But (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229167)

Is there anything worth running?

Cydroid (4, Informative)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42229223)

Given that iOS began as a stripped-down fork of Mac OS X, Darling could mean eventually running the entire contents of Cydia on Android devices in addition to the jailbroken iTrinkets that it currently runs on.

Android Store just more useful (4, Interesting)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42229383)

Darling could mean eventually running the entire contents of Cydia on Android

The days of iExclusivity have long passed, anything of value is already on both platforms, or that Android passed iOS both in number of Apps and Downloads in October [700,000 ans 25,000,000,000 respectively]. Although I believe that iOS should have always allowed 3rd party stores, and people should be allowed to move cross-platform programs...between platforms. I do think this unnecessary lock-in needs to be stopped.

Although me personally I have more interest in running my Android Apps on my touch-screen Linux Desktop.

DroidStep would make Play Store even more useful (2)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42229733)

Although I believe that iOS should have always allowed 3rd party stores, and people should be allowed to move cross-platform programs...between platforms.

A port of GNUstep to Android would let iOS application developers target Android with much less additional effort. It could help make a lot of currently App Store-exclusive applications into cross-platform applications.

Re:DroidStep would make Play Store even more usefu (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42230135)

GPLv3 means this is not getting anywhere near a non-rooted android. And even Linux ports of commercial applications will be rare if existing at all. Even if you are going to argue that an open license hindered early Wine, GPLv2 is the most encumbered license the world will accept.
I do contracts for a large company and they have an easy ruleset:
o BSD/MIT: do it and tell us.
o GPLv2: ask us for permission.
o GPLv3: Don't even look at it.

WTF? (0, Flamebait)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42230223)

o BSD/MIT: do it and tell us.
o GPLv2: ask us for permission.
o GPLv3: Don't even look at it.

LOL its nice to see a random Apple shareholder [Sorry about the shareprice btw] promoting BSD its so quaint. I notice BSD nix has suffered a great deal since Apples one way take. Linux on the other hand seems to be be thriving.

Quick list of GPL2 and 3 Apps on Android http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open_source_Android_applications [wikipedia.org]

Nothing to do with my post. (1, Insightful)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42230149)

A port of GNUstep to Android would let iOS application developers target Android with much less additional effort. It could help make a lot of currently App Store-exclusive applications into cross-platform applications.

...and this is backward thinking. Apple threw away market share protecting their profits, but we [by we I mean me and the ex-shareholders of Apple] are all in agreement that gravy chain is coming to an end. Apple need to step up, and support cross-platform development from the get go, otherwise they will find themselves marginalised [more] pretty quickly. I shouldn't have to reiterate...the days of iPhone exclusives are long over. You post would have maybe been relevant a year ago, but that is a long time ago.

Although this has little to do with my post, which is Apple need to open their storefront, to sell DRM free [or loose DRM] cross platform applications [and allow ease of those self same applications]...and update those of other stores. Otherwise again it will continue to marginalize itself. In fact I don't limit it to Apple because I think the freedom to move between *ecosystems* is going to become a problem, but locking myself into the loosing platform is not going to happen...and many more will follow me. I've seen how Apple treats its customers who bought its DRM ridden MP3's at 128...they have to pay a premium. I'm not into a company that has that mentality.

Xcode ... (4, Informative)

perpenso (1613749) | about 2 years ago | (#42229387)

Is there anything worth running?

Well the Xcode development environment is Mac OS X specific and unlikely to be ported to any other platform.

Re:But (-1, Troll)

A bsd fool (2667567) | about 2 years ago | (#42229399)

Perhaps the reverse. If you have OSX already, why are you messing around with linux? That's like being married to the hottest babe in the universe and then cheating on her with rosie.

Re:But (0)

arkane1234 (457605) | about 2 years ago | (#42229465)

I'm thinking it's more like people with 10 year old honda civics complaining about wall the yuppies with their BMW cars, but at the same time making hack kits to fit the rims,etc, from those BMW onto their cars...

Re:But (4, Insightful)

eyegor (148503) | about 2 years ago | (#42229491)

Because as good as OS X is, it's not a particularly good server platform and requires Mac hardware, while Linux has been around for ages, runs on commodity hardware, has a very well supported number of open source packages and is considered mainstream by most Unix admins.

As a server platform, OS X suffers from the same problem as Solaris. You need the vendor supplied hardware to get it to run well. Solaris is a dying OS because Sun and Oracle supplied hardware is too expensive and just isn't worth it when you can get three times the computing power for less money, and X86 Solaris is frankly crap, since it has such a small hardware compatibility list.

I don't mention BSD since it's not really mainstream any longer. It's a good OS, but lacks overall vendor support.

All that being said, I prefer OS X systems for my workstation and CentOS or Scientific Linux for servers. Redhat's nice, but overpriced when you need to deploy a lot of systems.

Re:But (-1, Offtopic)

A bsd fool (2667567) | about 2 years ago | (#42229551)

Because as good as OS X is, it's not a particularly good server platform and requires Mac hardware, while Linux has been around for ages, runs on commodity hardware, has a very well supported number of open source packages and is considered mainstream by most Unix admins.

Exactly what OSX binaries do you desire to run on your "server"?

I don't mention BSD since it's not really mainstream any longer

How big is the rock you're living under?

All that being said, I prefer OS X systems for my workstation and CentOS or Scientific Linux for servers. Redhat's nice, but overpriced when you need to deploy a lot of systems

1. CentOS =~ s/Red Hat/CentOS/g.

2. (Win7 || OSX) > Linux desktop; *BSD > Linux server.

Re:But (5, Interesting)

eyegor (148503) | about 2 years ago | (#42229679)

OS X is a capable OS, but best used as a workstation at best. Deploying large numbers of OS X servers is greatly complicated by the fact that even Apple acknowledges that there's no market for their server grade systems and they've stopped selling them. Even if I put a Mac Pro into production, they'd be so expensive and occupy so much room that they'd fill the data center. If I stick a Mac Pro sideways in a rack, it takes 4 or 5U at least for 12 cores. I can put 4 dual hex or octo core Xeon rack mount servers in the same space or even some dual 16 core opteron servers. If I choose to use blades, I can put 16 HP 460c blades in 10U.

Don't even mention the Mac Mini as a viable server platform, it's an underpowered joke of a system if you want to do real work on it for sustained periods of time. They're not intended for, nor will they stand up to the kind of loads you see in the enterprise.

I work in the IT industry running computational clusters and lots of other kinds of servers. My rock is pretty large, but I'm on the top of it.

I do have a couple of OS X servers in the enterprise, but they're only there to run Open Directory to manage our Mac workstations.

your assertion that windows 7 or OS X is better than a Linux server shows how out of touch you are with enterprise computing. We have some windows 2003 and 2008 servers in production, but they're there to provide infrastructure for the windows workstations. No one tries to do anything else with them since it's far easier to deploy services on Linux.

As I mentioned, I love apples workstations and laptops but they don't make an appropriate platform for running any meaningful services in the enterprise.

Re:But (1)

eyegor (148503) | about 2 years ago | (#42229709)

and yeah, I'm well aware of CentOS' lineage. We chose it because it's essentially Red Hat, but doesn't have the hefty price tag.

Re:But (0)

A bsd fool (2667567) | about 2 years ago | (#42229867)

I'm not a mac person. I recognize their strengths as desktops however, and don't fault those who prefer them over windows. You won't find me suggesting anyone run an OSX or Mini as a server. Your rock however must be small indeed because BSD is certainly "mainstream", as has been discussed on /. ad nauseam. You don't *see* it in your line of work perhaps, but it's there, in the background, making everything *work*. It's in every Juniper device. Hell, the os that runs the playstation3 is part FreeBSD, as is OSX itself.

your assertion that windows 7 or OS X is better than a Linux server shows how out of touch you are with enterprise computing.

RIF. I made no such assertion. I said they make a better desktop than Linux because, well, they do. The BSDs make better servers.

Re:But (4, Interesting)

eyegor (148503) | about 2 years ago | (#42230037)

Re: windows vs Mac, I personally hate using windows as a workstation, but I have one at home for gaming. In general, it's a crufty clunky dog's breakfast of an OS that's a pain in the butt to configure and update. I've used nearly every version of DOS or Windows since the days of DOS 2.0 and Windows 2.0, so I'm familiar with its flaws and foibles. The only versions I've never used are Vista and Win 8.

MacOS used to be a crap OS. It was pretty, but didn't multitask at all and crashed far too often to trust. OS/2 was nice, but fragile and was never as popular as Windows. OS X is an awesome OS for workstations and is excellent to work with for day-to-day stuff. The only Linux I use for workstation stuff is Ubuntu. CentOS as a workstation OS is ok, but is too much of a pain to deal with for stuff like sound cards, etc.

Slashdot has a lot of different kinds of people on it. Many of them hobbyists and people who work in small *nix shops. Many are also enterprise IT types and the most popular enterprise *nix is Linux, hands down. Redhat/CentOS flavors dominate, but there are a few debian shops as well, such as Akamai.

A lot of that stuff is just holy wars, but if you look at what vendors support what OS's, You don't typically see much for BSD. Our company recently retired a BSD cluster and are in the process of decommissioning our BSD-based servers for a myriad of reasons. Juniper may use BSD in their stuff, but many more use Linux as their embedded OS.

BSD is popular with some companies and in colleges, but when you get into the real world it's either Linux or Solaris and Solaris is fading fast. Look at the job market. Linux is what most companies are looking for. I'm not dissing BSD, but I'd never recommend it for anything in the enterprise.

I used to run some SunOS (bsd-flavored) systems 'back in the day' and loved them, but when Solaris came out, pretty much everyone switched. I've used Solaris 2.5 - Solaris 10 on both SPARC and X86 and have watched it decline over the years in popularity because of hardware costs and X86 compatibility issues. Oracle has made some really dumb moves over the years regarding the stuff they purchased as part of Sun and most admins I know have given up on their stuff.

Re:But (1)

jcr (53032) | about 2 years ago | (#42230257)

even Apple acknowledges that there's no market for their server grade systems and they've stopped selling them.

That's not quite correct. Apple's server and storage business was doing quite well. With the Xserve RAID, Apple was in fact the #3 storage vendor in the world when they discontinued the product.

The problem was that a line of business can be very successful, but still not successful enough to be worth Apple's investment of engineering time. If the same people who designed the Xserve can develop the next iMac instead, then Apple can't really justify delaying the consumer product.

If there were enough hardware engineers to fill these jobs, Apple might still be in the server business.

-jcr

How long before... (5, Insightful)

rbprbp (2731083) | about 2 years ago | (#42229171)

... Apple finds a loophole and sues this developer into oblivion?

Re:How long before... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229237)

Isn't there a law in place about reverse engineering for compatibility?

http://chillingeffects.org/reverse/faq.cgi

Question: What is interoperability?

Answer: Generally, interoperability allows technologies to work together when they use the same inputs and create the same outputs. For computers, interoperability is the abililty of programs and systems running on various kinds of software and hardware to communicate with each other.

Standards foster interoperability by ensuring that all groups implementing the standard interpret it the same way, so that the technology produces consistent performance regardless of the individual brand or model. By contrast, a lack of standards means that parties must reverse engineer the technology to achieve interoperability. Moreover, owners of proprietary, non-standardized technologies retain control over upgrades and developments to those technologies, and may change them at will, disrupting the interoperability with other technologies.

Re:How long before... (1)

spikenerd (642677) | about 2 years ago | (#42229261)

... Apple finds a loophole and sues this developer into oblivion?

...if only there was a similar situation we could use to predict how it might go.

Re:How long before... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229287)

It does not depend on who is right or wrong (not that Apple would care anyway). It depends on who has enough money to spare. Apple certainly has.

Even if their crusade goes nowhere they can stall and hinder the development of this enough.

Re:How long before... (1)

perpenso (1613749) | about 2 years ago | (#42229489)

...if only there was a similar situation we could use to predict how it might go.

... It depends on who has enough money to spare. Apple certainly has ...

And Microsoft did not when Wine got started?

Re:How long before... (1, Insightful)

dotgain (630123) | about 2 years ago | (#42230157)

Microsoft were not as flagrantly greedy and evil then as Apple are now.

Re:How long before... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42230443)

Was that during the time they were being prosecuted for using their monopoly status illegally? Look at what happened to IBM when they did the same sort of things and take a guess at why MS didn't do anything.

Re:How long before... (1)

rbprbp (2731083) | about 2 years ago | (#42229463)

... Apple finds a loophole and sues this developer into oblivion?

...if only there was a similar situation we could use to predict how it might go.

But Apple has enough money to turn the development of this into hell.

Re:How long before... (1)

jimicus (737525) | about 2 years ago | (#42229327)

Is it necessary? Wine started out life in 1993 and didn't release a stable version until 2008 - and even now requires a whacking great software compatibility list.

The developer should leave the US immediately. (0)

emil (695) | about 2 years ago | (#42229357)

Apple will most likely exploit their software patents to shut this down. Any attempt to host, support, or otherwise monetize this package should take place beyond our shores.

Re:How long before... (0)

Alter_3d (948458) | about 2 years ago | (#42229499)

... Apple sues this developer into oblivion?

FTFY... when has trigger happy Apple required loopholes to sue?

Re:How long before... (2)

Bogtha (906264) | about 2 years ago | (#42229641)

I know the summary says OS X, but this is just loading Darwin binaries. You know, Darwin, the BSD-based OS that Apple voluntarily open-sourced? I know Apple have a reputation as the next evil empire, but I think suing people for doing things that they specifically enabled with an open-source release is a bit unlikely.

Re:How long before... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229719)

If you bothered to RTFA, you'd see a simple Cocoa app running.

Re:How long before... (5, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 2 years ago | (#42229749)

Companies don't just sue people for no reason. For Apple to sue Darling, there'd have to be some kind of motivation for them to do so. Otherwise it would:

1. Waste a lot of money.
2. Cause a lot of ill-feeling
3. Possibly set precedents that bind it in future in a way damaging to Apple in the long term.

It's hard to see what kind of threat this product would be to Apple, and in theory it might even be a benefit.

Apple's market is based upon people liking the way Apple's devices work. With a small number of famous exceptions, few people buy Apple because of the exclusive availability of a particular piece of software. By and large, the vast majority of people interested in Apple's products aren't going to be interested in Ubuntu with a software compatibility layer. Of the few left who need a Mac for a particular piece of professional software, few are going to risk running that software on an unsupported compatibility layer.

I find it very improbable Apple will sue. I think they'll ignore it.

Re:How long before... (3, Funny)

martin-boundary (547041) | about 2 years ago | (#42229963)

... Apple finds a loophole and sues this developer into oblivion?

You leave Apple alone! They worked hard to design a rectangular LCD display for the Mac, and totally deserve their patents. If your laptop has a rectangular LCD and you're running Linux, you're just a cheapskate who's stopping progress and giving Steve Jobs an ulcer. He died because of you, you know!

Re:How long before... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42230361)

How long until you Linux fags aren't hypocritical about why you run Linux?
 
"We hatez teh Windoze and Steve Job's Wall Ghardends but we wants to run da software!!!!1111!!!!"
 
Fucking bitches. Eat your own fucking dog food, since you like to bitch anytime that Microsoft or Apple doesn't stick strictly to their own products in-house.
 
Where's teh innovations?!?11?!1?!?//1?!1?

Soooo... (2)

Longjmp (632577) | about 2 years ago | (#42229189)

... will I finally be able to cut & paste across applications? *ducks*
Seriously though, if this is going anywhere near wine, we'd have the best of three worlds on one platform.

Re:Soooo... (1)

mozumder (178398) | about 2 years ago | (#42229211)

I already have that.. it's called VMWare Fusion on a Macbook Pro. =^)

Pricing of retail Windows (0)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42229295)

How much did you pay for a copy of Windows to run in VMware? I seem to remember that VMware for Mac required the full-price retail version of Windows, not the discounted OEM version that a system builder bundles with a Windows PC. This appears to have changed as of Windows 8 with the new Personal Use License for System Builder [geek.com] , but then one has to suffer through the new metrosexual Start screen of Windows 8 and the convoluted gestures to even shut down the machine. Or what am I missing?

Re:Pricing of retail Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229351)

VMWare Fusion 3 and earlier worked with OEM disks.

This is illegal, you know (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42229765)

VMWare Fusion 3 and earlier worked with OEM [Windows install] disks.

But doing this was probably as illegal as a Hackintosh. Apple v. Psystar.

Re:Pricing of retail Windows (1)

King_TJ (85913) | about 2 years ago | (#42229401)

I think you're correct, technically. To hear things from Microsoft's point of view, a full retail copy of Windows XP Pro or 7 was required to run as a VM on a Mac.
An OEM license of Windows is only intended for use with the 1 new PC you purchased it with as a bundle.

On the other hand, I don't think the license specifically made any distinction that the new PC you purchased in a "bundle" with the OEM copy of Windows could NOT be a Mac? So you could probably buy a new Mac at a retailer like Micro Center and buy an OEM version of Windows 7 at the same time, for use with that Mac, and run it in a VM legally.

And simply because such a scenario can exist? It opens the door for a lot of "wiggle room" with the licensing. (How the heck is Microsoft going to know if that OEM copy of Windows 7 you possess and loaded on your Mac was actually purchased originally with said Mac, or if you really got it a few weeks earlier when you bought a new barebones PC that it turns out you put Linux on instead?)

Must be preinstalled (2)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42229785)

On the other hand, I don't think the license specifically made any distinction that the new PC you purchased in a "bundle" with the OEM copy of Windows could NOT be a Mac?

Because Apple doesn't sell bundles of Mac hardware and Windows OS.

So you could probably buy a new Mac at a retailer like Micro Center and buy an OEM version of Windows 7 at the same time, for use with that Mac, and run it in a VM legally.

As I understand the Windows license prior to PULSB, Micro Center would have had to install Windows into Boot Camp or VirtualBox or VMware before selling the Mac. I don't know if Apple allows its authorized resellers to do that. Unfortunately, I can't really look further because after PULSB, the old "Windows Licensing for Hobbyists" page on Microsoft's site appears to be 404.

How the heck is Microsoft going to know if that OEM copy of Windows 7 you possess and loaded on your Mac was actually purchased originally with said Mac

I don't know whether Microsoft actually does this, but the Windows product key could be stored with the computer's serial number in a database that Microsoft could reserve the right to audit.

Re:Must be preinstalled (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229975)

As I understand the Windows license prior to PULSB, Micro Center would have had to install Windows into Boot Camp or VirtualBox or VMware before selling the Mac. I don't know if Apple allows its authorized resellers to do that.

As an employee of a Value Added Authorized Reseller, we can do that at my company. In fact, we don't sell any laptops other than Mac laptops as they are best suited for our purpose and our industry. Of course there are Windows user in our industry, and for that we route them to either a PC custom built by us, or a MacBook Pro that we've preinstalled BootCamp, Windows, and a suite of apps on. Posting anon to avoid killing mods I've made.

Re:Pricing of retail Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42230235)

Doesn't bother me, since I bought a copy of windows. Licenses only apply to rentals or signed contracts.

Re:Pricing of retail Windows (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about 2 years ago | (#42229941)

Maybe he's running Linux in Fusion. With Wine even.

Re:Soooo... (1)

Longjmp (632577) | about 2 years ago | (#42229309)

Interesting, so you are running Darling VM on a linux VM, and since your response implied Win too...

Cheer up, just kidding :)

Re:Soooo... (1)

Guy Harris (3803) | about 2 years ago | (#42229671)

I already have that.. it's called VMWare Fusion on a Macbook Pro. =^)

That's a little different, but if somebody were to make a package to let you run Linux binaries on OS X (including hacking the execsw[] table in xnu/bsd/kern/kern_exec.c [apple.com] to have an image activator for ELF binaries) and combine it with Wine for OS X [winehq.org] , that's another alternative along the lines of Wine+Darling-on-Linux. (Extra credit for hacking execsw[] to handle PE binaries as well. :-))

I don't know how much Windows NT source would be needed to complete the circle and add the ability to run OS X and Linux binaries on Windows.

Re:Soooo... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229901)

Glad you like your triple-to-quadruple-the-price-at-half-the-specs hardware.

Cue Apple's lawyers (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42229275)

will I finally be able to cut & paste across applications? *ducks*

If you're referring to some imagined deficiency of the GNU/Linux operating environment, then explain how I just copied and pasted your comment from Firefox to Leafpad [freeshell.org] , composed the reply in Leafpad, and copied and pasted it back to Firefox, all on Xubuntu 12.04. Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V work just as easily to move text around between applications in GNU/Linux as in Windows.

Seriously though, if this is going anywhere near wine, we'd have the best of three worlds on one platform.

Cue Apple's lawyers scrambling to find a way around the ruling of API uncopyrightability in Oracle v. Google.

Re:Cue Apple's lawyers (0)

aliquis (678370) | about 2 years ago | (#42229333)

I'm not saying that's the issue both both applications you mentioned use GTK so maybe that's one reason why it works but may not work in other cases.

And GNU/Linux isn't all GTK.

Re:Cue Apple's lawyers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229507)

I use a combination of Qt/KDE apps, GTK apps, and stuff that uses other toolkits or their own system for it (the latter generally sucks and I only use them when there's no good alternative, but I digress). I have never had an issue with copy/paste in... I don't even know how long. Even with VMs, Wine, etc., copy/paste across the host OS, VMs, and WINE apps, all work flawlessly. In fact, Klipper (obviously, I'm running KDE as my DE) makes it an even better experience than any other OS I use...

Re:Cue Apple's lawyers (5, Informative)

Guy Harris (3803) | about 2 years ago | (#42229587)

I'm not saying that's the issue both both applications you mentioned use GTK so maybe that's one reason why it works but may not work in other cases.

And GNU/Linux isn't all GTK.

"All GTK" may be sufficient to make cut/copy/paste work between applications, but it's not necessary. I just did a quick Wireshark build (to get a GTK+ application) on my Fedora-16-with-KDE-4 (virtual) machine, and was able to cut with ^X or copy with ^C from the Wireshark filter text box and paste with ^V into the app launcher Search text box and KWord, and cut or copy from either of the latter and paste it into the Wireshark filter text box.

So it works at least between those versions of GTK+ 2.x and Qt 4.x. There's no guarantee it will work between toolkits A and B for arbitrary values of A and B, but if a toolkit implements cut/copy/paste as per the freedesktop.org clipboard consensus [freedesktop.org] - as that page notes, Qt and GTK+ both do - cut/copy/paste should work between applications using that toolkit and other applications using that toolkit and other toolkits that implement cut/copy/paste as per that consensus. (According to the page on that consensus [freedesktop.org] , Qt 2 and GNU Emacs 20 didn't implement cut/copy/paste as per that consensus, but Qt 3 and GNU Emacs 21 would.)

None of that, BTW, gets rid of paste-current-selection, i.e. the action usually bound to the middle mouse button on many UN*X GUIs.

(Note, BTW, that the X11 term "selection" doesn't necessarily mean "what you've selected in the application"; that's the PRIMARY selection, but there's also the CLIPBOARD selection, which is whatever you've cut or copied, and the SECONDARY selection, which is probably unused unless you're using an XView application.)

Re:Cue Apple's lawyers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229495)

Now try to do that with a PDF.

If Wine supports clipboard, Darling can too (3, Informative)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42229675)

I've seen copy and paste from a PDF fail on Windows too, for any of at least three reasons:
  1. Digital restrictions management applied to the PDF that disables Copy.
  2. Several PDF tools are capable of "subsetting" of fonts, in which unused glyphs are removed. But the subsetting functions in some PDF tools will rearrange the character encoding.
  3. PDFs are often created from faxes or other scans of paper documents that haven't had OCR applied.

In any case, I opened the first PDF that I found in ~/Downloads, copied a paragraph, and successfully pasted it into Leafpad. So copying from Evince to Leafpad worked. Then I did wine notepad.exe and pasted the same paragraph from Evince into Wine Notepad. To finish proving the point, I even typed this very sentence into Wine Notepad and copied and pasted it into Firefox. So if they managed to get the clipboard working between GTK+ and Wine, I don't see the big obstacle to getting it working between GTK+ and Darling.

Re:Soooo... (0)

loufoque (1400831) | about 2 years ago | (#42229397)

what OS X application is worth running on Linux?

Re:Soooo... (1)

Longjmp (632577) | about 2 years ago | (#42229461)

what OS X application is worth running on Linux?

In my case, one example: Photoshop with a Wacom tablet.

And no, I'm not going to invest hours or even days to find drivers etc. for a workaround.

I doubt Darling will provide that either, but one still can hope. Anyway, I'm sure other will find more (and better) examples.

Re:Soooo... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229639)

But Photoshop has a Windows version, which is better than the Mac version.

Re:Soooo... (1)

corychristison (951993) | about 2 years ago | (#42229651)

There are Wacom tablet drivers in the Linux Kernel and Photoshop works great under WINE. Surely it should "Just Work" on a properly compiled & configured kernel/userland?
This is a sincere question.

I use Photoshop CS (v9? - also tried CS4 trial and it worked pretty good, but my workstation is too old it ran really slow) under WINE all the time but I have never used a Wacom tablet. My brother has one so I am sure I could try it, but I know I specifically stripped out Wacom drivers from my kernel when I upgraded to 3.6.8 earlier this week.

Re:Soooo... (1)

Longjmp (632577) | about 2 years ago | (#42229855)

Surely it should "Just Work" ...

since you asked, I'll try to give a sincere answer.
Point is, I won't be of much help here. I have an environment that works. That is MacOS with drivers supported by Wacom. I prefer Linux for other tasks, but that's not the issue here.
You mention "properly compiled & configured" kernals... Do I bother? No.
Do I want to invest hours of my time trying to accomplish something I already have? No.
As someone pointed out, the Win version of PS is better now than the Mac version (used to be opposite). If I need to, I'll move to Win, practical solution.

So, conclusion is: you want to accomplish something, chose the proper tool. One that works. If you are just playing, play. And play as much as you can, it will help you to chose the right tool later when you need it.

Re:Soooo... (1)

damnbunni (1215350) | about 2 years ago | (#42229897)

I know a lot of people who get a real kick out of Garage Band, iMovie, and iDVD. Delicious Library is pretty neat. The Mac version of iTunes is much less sucktastic than the Windows version. (It still blows, though. And I say that as a Mac user.)

Re:Soooo... (1)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 2 years ago | (#42230467)

what OS X application is worth running on Linux?

Some OSX aficionados really like Pixelmator, a photo editing program which is an alternative to Photoshop. I haven't used it myself so I can't say whether it would be worth it or not.

Finally! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229229)

I have been waiting for something like this. Great to see someone started it!

The sad part is... (1, Redundant)

itsphilip (934602) | about 2 years ago | (#42229279)

Instead of thinking. "Wow, this is cool.." I thought, "Apple is going to sue the developer into the poor house..."

Finally the year of OSX on the Desktop! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229297)

How about a Darwin Award for running it on Linux? What can go wrong, other than OSX virii can now run on Linux like win32 virii can run on Linux? Surely, Microsoft WINDOWS and Aplle OSX are nowhere near the disease vector potential as Linux presently is! Linux runs everything now!

NES viruses (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#42229355)

For one thing, -ii is plural of -ius, and nothing else. For another, Linux can already run NES viruses inside FCEUX. (See Dr. Mario [youtube.com] and NES Virus Cleaner [youtube.com] .)

iOS emulation should be discouraged (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229435)

The amount of effort put into WINE has been quite large. Popular, binary API, single platform programs might have been an acceptable tradeoff in the era of a thousand dollars for the CPU and RAM, but today, a 1 ghz P3, 256 MB RAM equivalent costs under 30 dollars. Unless a program written today is high performance, it should not be using nonportable binary APIs.

What about the rest of the APIs? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229447)

This is nifty in all, but all their example application is doing is literally the graphical equivalent of "hello world".

GNUStep still only implements maybe 30% of the Apple APIs out there. And they still don't do them 100% the same way- see NSDecimalNumber for reference (Apple has a really stupid whacked way of doing it, GNUStep's implementation is slightly more sane- but they still shouldn't be straying from what Apple does if they want a compatible API in the end). Things like Core Animation, Core Graphics, Core Image, etc... Forget about it. The GNUStep guys have barely even bothered to look at that stuff, let alone implementing it.

Sadly, there is a lot more to a modern day Macintosh application then your standard NS/CF classes (even though Core Foundation is kinda opensource). You're not going to see Tweetbot or Cornerstone or Coda 2 running on anything other then OS X for a very, very long time. iOS might be a bit different since the majority of UIKit is very well understood (and there are various other APIs out there designed to re-implement it), so basic iOS applications could probably run with little effort- but for anything using APIs outside of UIKit (again, Core Animation, Core Graphics, Core Audio, Core MIDI, so on and so forth)- nobody has really spent any time on understanding how those work and re-implementing them elsewhere, and a lot of apps hook into this stuff to give you the nifty iOS experience that other handhelds can't.

In other words, the biggest barrier to this project isn't running OS X binaries on Linux. That's easy. It's implementing the other 70% of the stuff that nobody has even remotely begun to poke at. The OS X API library is vast and expansive, and GNUStep has done a good job replicating what we had on NeXTSTEP in the 1990s- but they've got absolutely none of the modern OS X stuff.

Can it run iworks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229449)

Can it run iworks?

wide mouth, both ends (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229485)

but can you fit an entire apple in your rectum?

:D (1)

BumpyCarrot (775949) | about 2 years ago | (#42229529)

As a former Linux user and current Mac user with concerns over Apple's direction, this is the most exciting Linux news I've heard in a while. I realise it's probably a ways off, but if I could run eg. Reason on Ubuntu and there was a nice *step style WM (with a real maximize button!) I could be sold :)

The solution to the Linux email clients question (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229541)

I guess if we can run Mail.app the issue of crappy email clients on Linux is solved.

Re:The solution to the Linux email clients questio (2)

iggymanz (596061) | about 2 years ago | (#42230237)

even more awesome, we can now run Outlook for Mac on Linux! standard at my work, it sucks even worse and harder than outlook on windows

Re:The solution to the Linux email clients questio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42230295)

By using one that is deliberately designed for the dumbest, lowest and laziest of human life, so that it is limiting even a monkey or a 4 year old in efficiency?

Yeah... *totally* what Linux users... the *only* actually computer-literate people touching computers want!

Why do you think we still use MUTT? Because we want to sit there and drool on a tablet with a big red button saying "magic" that "knows" what we want (in that it tells us what we're supposed to want, app-store-censorship style)?

Here is my take on that (1)

Seeteufel (1736784) | about 2 years ago | (#42229611)

Actually GNUSTEP as a project works like that: FOSDEM - New Work done - SILENCE - FOSDEM - New Work Done - ... And everyone thinks: Well, why don't they go after Mac OS X emulation as a "vision" because otherwise the project lacks a good mission that inspires new contributions. Actually I thought it for the past 10 years but it always interesting to see how they start off after the annual FOSDEM meeting.

Re:Here is my take on that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229665)

For reasons unknown, they do add new Cocoa APIs, but don't want to be known as a Cocoa reimplementation. My guess is that being known as such would bring them new developers.

Steam (2, Funny)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | about 2 years ago | (#42229667)

Oh joy. Now I'll be running three versions of Steam: All Linux games on the Linux client for to encourage support for FOSS platforms, the Mac client for generic multi-platform solidarity, and the Windows client for the rest of it.

Re:Steam (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229917)

Oh joy. Now I'll be running three versions of Steam: All Linux games on the Linux client for to encourage support for FOSS platforms, the Mac client for generic multi-platform solidarity, and the Windows client for the rest of it.

WHY?
Seriously though, WHY?

Re:Steam (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229997)

Doesn't matter. You can only run one Steam instance per account. You could try logging into three different accounts to get around that.

duh... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42229813)

Well, duh! Mac OS-X is nothing but a BSD clone with a GUI strapped on top.

Apple's compiler wold be nice (cross-compiling) (1)

caseih (160668) | about 2 years ago | (#42229945)

A few years ago I regularly built Qt-based binaries on my Linux machine, targeting PPC OS X (10.3). It was pretty slick. I tried to set up a cross-compiling environment later under 10.4 fat binary days, but that proved too difficult, sadly. As it stands now, if I could run apple's native compiler and tools under linux, outputting nice OS X app bundles for Qt apps, that would be pretty slick.

Re:Apple's compiler wold be nice (cross-compiling) (1)

Guy Harris (3803) | about 2 years ago | (#42229987)

A few years ago I regularly built Qt-based binaries on my Linux machine, targeting PPC OS X (10.3). It was pretty slick. I tried to set up a cross-compiling environment later under 10.4 fat binary days, but that proved too difficult, sadly. As it stands now, if I could run apple's native compiler and tools under linux, outputting nice OS X app bundles for Qt apps, that would be pretty slick.

Start here [apple.com] .

Wine still not supported as a 64-bit slackbuild. (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 2 years ago | (#42229951)

While I understand it's possible to get Wine working on 64-bit Linux, it's my experience that it's not really supported on a pure-64 bit system... at least not on Slackbuilds.org [slackbuilds.org]

Anybody working on the other way around? (1)

Shag (3737) | about 2 years ago | (#42229967)

The build process on OS X is just different enough from Linux to be a real bugbear when I try to compile some obscure console-mode app (naim, for example), usually making osxports puke its guts out on the next-to-last of a hundred dependencies. It'd be pretty nice if I could just download binaries built for Linux and use them.

NetBSD attempted this a decade ago (3, Interesting)

manu0601 (2221348) | about 2 years ago | (#42230129)

There was a similar [slashdot.org] attempt [onlamp.com] in NetBSD almost 10 years ago. .

That prehistoric project implemented Mach-O loader, Mach system calls, and has been able to start OS X display server. It felt short actually displaying something useful, and died from lack of user interest.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?