site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com Does this mean that you can not recompile the sources and get a kernel that will function with all the usual Mac OS X applications? <http://developer.apple.com/sdk/> S+E -- Quinn "The Eskimo!" <http://www.apple.com/developer/> Apple Developer Relations, Developer Technical Support, Core OS/Hardware _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-kernel mailing list (Darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-kernel/site_archiver%40lists.a... At 16:26 -0700 22/3/07, Michael Crawford wrote: On 3/22/07, Craig Newell <craign@ieee.org> wrote: On Mar 22, 2007, at 17:10 , Michael Smith wrote: a) the source as released is necessarily exactly the source that was used to build the product No, it will work That's right. And, incidentally, this is one of the things that introduces delay between releasing the final product and releasing the Darwin source for it. rebuilding the kernel is recommended by Apple when one wants to do source code debugging of drivers. Well, I wouldn't necessarily say "recommended". In general, if you're developing a KEXT, you can usually get by with using the Darwin source combined with the symbol files from the Kernel Debug Kit. However, there are times where it's really useful to run a kernel built from source; for example, when you want to add debugging code to the subsystem that you're plugging in to. At that point building the Darwin kernel and sliding it under Mac OS X is a fine option. This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com