1 |
On Aug 24, 2005, at 10:22 AM, Finn Thain wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> |
4 |
> |
5 |
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Kito wrote: |
6 |
> |
7 |
>>> I don't think it likely that apple will open source Mac OS X (or |
8 |
>>> eleven, or even system seven). I mean, is it likely that a macos |
9 |
>>> profile could ever be anything but second fiddle? |
10 |
>> |
11 |
>> The progressive profile already is, and getting moreso as it matures. |
12 |
>> fex it can/will be used to merge macos components from Apple |
13 |
>> installation media. So it is in fact handling the compilation of the |
14 |
>> 'bsd' portion of OS X from source as well as managing the proprietary |
15 |
>> libs and tools like CoreAudio, XCode, etc. This way, packages can do |
16 |
>> things like "DEPEND='>=dev-util/xcode2.1 |
17 |
>>> =media-sound/coreaudio'" and so on. So used in this manner, |
18 |
>>> portage is |
19 |
>> anything but a second class citizen as everything in / is in fact |
20 |
>> managed by portage. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> What I'm saying is that you cannot build Mac OS X, Apple will not |
23 |
> permit |
24 |
> that. If you wan't to install X Code, you have to script apple's |
25 |
> installer |
26 |
> to do it. That is 2nd fiddle. |
27 |
|
28 |
Erm, no. It installs by extracting the files from the installation |
29 |
media similar to how other closed source software is installed via |
30 |
portage, doom, UTK2004, vmware, etc. Maybe we have different ideas of |
31 |
what 'second-fiddle' means. I interpret that as portage existing on a |
32 |
system with a specified set of fake deps in package.provided. IMHO |
33 |
portage is not second fiddle when it manages all files on the system. |
34 |
|
35 |
> |
36 |
>> Even once prefixed installs are available I intend to continue |
37 |
>> development in this area to facilitate extremely minimal OS X |
38 |
>> installs |
39 |
>> for specialized applications. |
40 |
> |
41 |
> I applaud this. But I think calling that profile "macos" is a |
42 |
> misnomer. |
43 |
|
44 |
Where do you draw the line? If during a macos install I choose not to |
45 |
install all options available is it no longer macos proper? Macos to |
46 |
me implies CoreFoundation, Quartz, and Aqua. Tons of other closed- |
47 |
source frameworks make up MacOS as well of course, but if you add |
48 |
CoreFoundation, Quartz, and Aqua to a Darwin system, its macos IMHO. |
49 |
|
50 |
> That's why I suggested calling upstream darwin, "ppc-darwin". The fact |
51 |
> that it isn't called macos doesn't imply macos and macos packages |
52 |
> cannot |
53 |
> be supported on it. |
54 |
|
55 |
The default-darwin profile is just that, though not currently a valid |
56 |
profile with its own keyword, but all macos profiles inherit from |
57 |
that. If you have a Darwin system with the closed source macos libs |
58 |
installed, its no longer Darwin as it tends to all come back to the |
59 |
difference between CoreFoundation(macos) and CF-Lite(Darwin/ |
60 |
OpenDarwin). I think I see what you are saying, I just don't agree :p |
61 |
Anyway you look at it its all rather semantical, but needs to be |
62 |
addressed nonetheless. |
63 |
|
64 |
Of course, when apple finally gets fed up with the warez kiddies |
65 |
running OS X on greybox crap and stops doing source releases, this |
66 |
will all become irrelevant anyway :p |
67 |
|
68 |
> |
69 |
> -f |
70 |
> |
71 |
>> --Kito |
72 |
>> |
73 |
>>> |
74 |
>>> -f |
75 |
>>> |
76 |
>>>> |
77 |
>>>>> |
78 |
>>>>> I suspect the whole question goes away when portage gets |
79 |
>>>>> prefixes. So my |
80 |
>>>>> post was probably just noise. Sorry. |
81 |
>>>>> |
82 |
>>>>> -f |
83 |
>>>>> -- |
84 |
>>>>> gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |
85 |
>>>>> |
86 |
>>>> |
87 |
>>>> |
88 |
>>> -- |
89 |
>>> gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |
90 |
>>> |
91 |
>> |
92 |
>> |
93 |
> -- |
94 |
> gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |
95 |
> |
96 |
|
97 |
-- |
98 |
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |