February 2006 - Darwin-dev - lists.apple.com

Re: Intel source code release
by Graham J Lee 19 Feb '06

19 Feb '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Macintosh/20051201) Someone really ought to give them all copies of the same hymnsheet :-( -- Graham Lee UNIX Systems Manager, Oxford Physics Practical Course http://users.ox.ac.uk/~wadh1342 _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… On 19/2/06 20:07, Dave Schroeder wrote: This is about a fundamental shift in strategy on a product with no notice or communication whatsoever to the community. Will Apple's server and enterprise strategy suffer the same fate? After I purchase 50 Xserves, will the Xserve family be discontinued with no notice? I don't think anyone told half the people at Apple, either. According to http://www.apple.com/opensource, "As the first major computer company to make Open Source development a key part of its ongoing software strategy, Apple remains committed to the Open Source development model. Major components of Mac OS X, including the UNIX-based core, are made available under Apple’s Open Source license, allowing developers and students to view source code, learn from it and submit suggestions and modifications" This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Intel source code release
by Michael Bartosh 19 Feb '06

19 Feb '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com On Feb 19, 2006, at 1:07 PM, Dave Schroeder wrote: -mb _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… This is about a fundamental shift in strategy on a product with no notice or communication whatsoever to the community. I hope it's not that. I'm calling the glass half full for now- I think that due to the logistics of maintaining parallel build trains (three I believe, since I'm guessing MacBook Pro and Core Duo iMac have their own builds) is prohibitive to a source release. I'm hoping once everything gets sync'd up this will change. Two or three times a month I need an answer that only source will give- just this week I needed to figure out how the DirectoryService LDAPv3 Plug- in could harvest LDAP replica data out of DNS. It's certainly not documented anywhere. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Intel source code release
by Michael Bartosh 19 Feb '06

19 Feb '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com On Feb 19, 2006, at 12:31 PM, Finlay Dobbie wrote: Am 19.02.2006 um 18:36 schrieb Michael Bartosh: AFAIK they're not manufacturing any new product, and they're all sold out of 17". But like I said- it is what it is, which is a great consumer platform. -mb _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… On 2/19/06, Markus Hitter <mah(a)jump-ing.de> wrote: (keeping the PPC iMac in production longer, for instance) ??? The iMac G5 is still purchaseable brand new. Yup. There are stocks in certain places, but I have seen Apple sales folks really, really work to get customers moved to Intel. Which is an entirely new code base, requires qualification of a large number of deployed applications (essentially doubling the deployment work load, since apps have to be qualified and meet acceptance criteria on two platforms). Not to mention the work of maintaining parallel load sets (or system images) with identical user experiences on two different platforms (with no tools to ease that work flow). Then there's the idea that this came earlier than Apple originally projected.. catching some customers off balance. (Developers, too, I'm sure). This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Intel source code release
by Dave Schroeder 19 Feb '06

19 Feb '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com This turn of events is extremely disappointing, to say the least. ---- ...well, not any more. Compare: http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/10.4.4.ppc/ http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/10.4.4.x86/ and http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/10.4.5.ppc/ http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/10.4.5.x86/ Regards, Dave Schroeder | University of Wisconsin - Madison Senior Systems Engineer | Division of Information Technology Email: das(a)doit.wisc.edu | Systems Engineering Web: das.doit.wisc.edu | B263 Computer Science and Statistics Cell: +1 608 444-5672 | 1210 West Dayton Street Phone: +1 608 265-4737 | Madison, Wisconsin 53706-1685 _____________________________________________________ Subscription Options and Archives http://listserv.cuny.edu/archives/macenterprise.html _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… I think we're all kind of missing the point, here. This isn't about whether Apple "has to" release code under the BSD license, its own license, or anything else. This is about a fundamental shift in strategy on a product with no notice or communication whatsoever to the community. Will Apple's server and enterprise strategy suffer the same fate? After I purchase 50 Xserves, will the Xserve family be discontinued with no notice? If you think that's ridiculous, consider how much Apple trumpeted the concept of the Darwin OS, Darwin components, and all of the other non- GPL open source components in Mac OS X and Mac OS X Server. Or, if you think Apple can just cancel things like this with impunity, you'd be correct, but then it had better stop representing itself as an any semblance of an enterprise company in enterprise markets. Also, I sincerely hope that none of this was done as a misguided attempt to somehow prevent Mac OS X (Intel) from being hacked to run on non-Apple systems. Because it's already been done, and will continue to be done. Please note that I'm not one of these idiotic "pro-Mac OS X piracy" people; in fact, I've spoken out quite against Mac OS X piracy and in defense of Apple's choices regarding Mac OS X (Intel) in various forums (e.g. <http://slashdot.org/comments.pl? sid=177400&cid=14717521>). But the point is that Mac OS X will continue to be hacked to run on non-Apple hardware indefinitely, as has already been done (for those not following, yes, the final, shipping release of Mac OS X (Intel) has already been hacked to run on non-Apple hardware). What follows is a message I sent out to the MacEnterprise.org mailing list this week: From: Dave Schroeder <das(a)DOIT.WISC.EDU> Date: February 17, 2006 12:40:18 AM CST To: MACENTERPRISE(a)LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU Subject: Come on in, we're ____ Reply-To: Mac OS X enterprise deployment project <MACENTERPRISE(a)LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> Well, I waited for a while to see what I could find out, and it appears Darwin, as a standalone OS and as something that represented all of formerly open source components of Mac OS X, is dead. Pretty stark difference, huh? No APSL projects are released in the x86 tree, only GPL stuff that Richard Stallman raised a stink about and forced Apple to release a month late. Also, today http://developer.apple.com/darwin/ redirects to http:// developer.apple.com/opensource/ and Apple apparently disallowed any indexing or caching of former Darwin page by search engines or archive.org, so you can't see their glowing descriptions of Darwin and what it represented. Also, http://developer.apple.com/darwin/ projects/darwin/, the Darwin OS project, also now redirects to http:// developer.apple.com/opensource/. Also, corresponding Apple-specific open source projects for Mac OS X Server appear gone. And since Mac OS X 10.5.x (Leopard) is expected to be unified, one wonders if all of the non-GPL open source pieces will go away as well. Stunningly, no one has really brought this up on any of the Darwin lists, and Apple must have figured out that since there's no pressure, or since no one has figured it out yet, it doesn't have to say anything. Apple must just figure it can "disappear" major projects, fundamentally change strategy and course for its primary product (the operating system) and kill off a major basis and selling point of Mac OS X and Mac OS X Server, and something that has been an extremely useful set of tools for us for the last few years, without telling anyone. Apple still hasn't figured out how to deal with enterprise customers; how to strike this balance between its need for secrecy and enterprise IT's need for roadmap information, consistency, and communication, and this is becoming more upsetting each day. The situation is getting worse, not better. This isn't about the source, per se: it's about an apparent major fundamental change in direction with no communication or consultation whatsoever. Apple: when is this going to change? I would just give up if it weren't for the fact that Apple keeps insisting it wants to get better on dealing with enterprise customers; that it wants more channels for communication and support. That it wants to develop strategies and programs to support enterprise customers. But as the years go by, I see little to no evidence of this. There have been occasional steps forward...but more steps backward. If this trend continues - especially as IBM, Sun, Red Hat, and Microsoft fall all over themselves to assist us (no, they're not perfect, but they're a LOT better) - I'm not sure what will happen... This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Intel source code release
by Shawn Erickson 19 Feb '06

19 Feb '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:31 AM, Finlay Dobbie wrote: Am 19.02.2006 um 18:36 schrieb Michael Bartosh: AFAIK they're not manufacturing any new product, and they're all sold out of 17". -Shawn _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… On 2/19/06, Markus Hitter <mah(a)jump-ing.de> wrote: (keeping the PPC iMac in production longer, for instance) ??? The iMac G5 is still purchaseable brand new. I believe that is true. Of course Apple has traditionally maintained systems for backwards compatible needs for at least a year from the last date of manufacture (for example keeping a G4 PowerMac available after the G5 came out). They wont maintain one for every class of system but will likely maintain at least one once the whole of the Mac line is on Intel. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Intel source code release
by Finlay Dobbie 19 Feb '06

19 Feb '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=mwPcUXdiQs7KhtYv14c7XU8LsJsn+wVSffQZS1ZTFaQfRCChJDn63YwfMKBqN09J00Wwd5CTkmINUFWDqC8r4jxnQAd/Og47URNTLv2vQs8E7qPU/McT8hgVoyMylPxFzrtG3NtrcuNUVK2tzR9nqFHET5RAmp1a/hlYR0l8HKc= On 2/19/06, Markus Hitter <mah(a)jump-ing.de> wrote: > > Am 19.02.2006 um 18:36 schrieb Michael Bartosh: > > > (keeping the PPC iMac in production longer, for instance) > > ??? The iMac G5 is still purchaseable brand new. AFAIK they're not manufacturing any new product, and they're all sold out of 17". -- Finlay _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Intel source code release
by Markus Hitter 19 Feb '06

19 Feb '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com Am 19.02.2006 um 18:36 schrieb Michael Bartosh: ??? The iMac G5 is still purchaseable brand new. Markus - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/ _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… (keeping the PPC iMac in production longer, for instance) I certainly hope we see a source release soon. One can hope for almost everything, but I'm quite sure you won't see sources. Apple is back to the closed source model it had in the MacOS (1-9) days. Every piece of source they publish will make the life of the Mac-OS-X- on-generic-hardware hackers easier. Instead of providing these sources, Apple implemented noticeable steps in the opposite direction. See <http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/ 06/02/19/0312205.shtml> and this other site. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Intel source code release
by Michael Bartosh 19 Feb '06

19 Feb '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com On Feb 17, 2006, at 9:26 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: This is a joke really because it was rushed by management and the software is no where near ready. Look at the compiler for an example, Apple did not update to a newer version of GCC during that time which means they are behind in speed in general anyways. Projects got pushed back because of this switch. An example is the move to dwarf2 debugging and multiple other things. Nine months is not enough time to do a proper release of any kind of big software as Mac OS X. -- Pinski A GCC developer which gets little credit from Apple for keeping GCC working on Darwin (even on x86 lately). -mb _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… Nine months of really hard work by the folks at Apple, who rightly decided that it was more important to deliver a kick-ass x86 operating system than to spend forever trying to package the sources for third-party consumption. Apple has to do what's best for Apple overall. I'm in a similar position- I work with a lot of the IT centric segments of Apple's market, and we have a very specific set of needs that doesn't always align with Apple's vision of its own roadmap. The Intel transition could have been handled differently there, in a way that was easier for IT customers to plan for and deal with. This doesn't mean it was handled badly- just that there's room for improvement. And some of the things that could have made it easier (keeping the PPC iMac in production longer, for instance) might have (and I'm only guessing here) detracted from Apple's overall goals somehow. It takes years of careful advocacy to get Apple to broaden its focus even a little bit. That's somewhat unfortunate but in this case I can only assume Apple had specific goals that were more important to it organizationally than dwarf2 debugging. Apple did a great job of bringing a consumer platform to market. I'm assuming that's what they set out to do. I certainly hope we see a source release soon. I am specifically ansey about booter.efi. My customers need to know how that thing works. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: intel source code release
by Peter O'Gorman 18 Feb '06

18 Feb '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317) Thank you, Peter _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… Derick Centeno wrote: If what has been reported here is true and Apple is changing or has removed standard open source components to it's purposes (whatever that may be), which further limits other current and potentially workable open source projects -- also reported, it might be time to consider the fact that Apple did enter into a open source agreement of a particular unique nature which has aspects of the GPL standard but is not completely standard open source. In short, it is a form of "open source" as Apple has redefined as open source in it's own terms, which Apple feels comfortable with; this is the kind of "open source" definition which Apple developers engage together with Apple in employing. Apple is not the only company to do so, and probably won't be the last. Apple is not violating any contracts by not releasing the sources to *BSD projects. It was not my intent to solicit advertising for yellow dog linux, thank you very much. Apple has no obligation to publish the source code to the non-GPL portions of their codebase. I simply believe that it benifits Apple to do so. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Intel source code release
by Peter O'Gorman 18 Feb '06

18 Feb '06

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Mike Smith wrote: | | On Feb 17, 2006, at 12:03 PM, darwin-dev-request(a)lists.apple.com wrote: |> By limiting published source code to that which is "infected" by the |> GPL, |> Apple is, in my honest opinion, scoring an own goal. | | | You might search for a simpler reason. | | Nine months of really hard work by the folks at Apple, who rightly decided | that it was more important to deliver a kick-ass x86 operating system than | to spend forever trying to package the sources for third-party | consumption. Mike, This seems like a bit of fantasy to me, I think it would have been far simpler to put out the entire cctools project rather than looking for the GNU as sources and putting them in a gas-590.23.2 tarball. Apple has never bothered to "package the sources for third-party consumption" as can be seen from complaints on this list over the years, a number of projects can not be built due to missing files etc. Regardless, I sincerely hope that the source code will eventually appear. I strongly believe that having the sources in the open is of benefit to Apple. Enjoy your beer, thank you for your hard work. Peter -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBQ/cZOriDAg3OZTLPAQIhmQQAp8f8iE+L7VT9ymFqOt/Vzai6Ot5faHlE QjlhDJmgHRlzitgP8AZEoOdbd705e5ZznCuVfUtodLQx/i2L9xfy9JrN2+qShbB0 /3NS0rnjNYIVc11m90Y3YCcmCXNFmBue6jrTnPZLNWNjfetYv62W3HI4YD6buRpC 5mVpPQeCys4= =dGsM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0