Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 48

Thread: Work Still Underway To Run OS X Binaries On Linux

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    683

    Default

    This project is also a way to run PowerPC applications from Mac on PowerPC Linux, something that won't work with Wine since Windows applications do not come in a PowerPC flavor.

    Also older versions of Mac and Windows are not moving targets yet they have applications that do not run on the modern systems and this is also a possible solutions for these.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    715

    Default

    i really like this project the OpenGL on Mac is going to be 4.x Soon and Linux is at 4.3 it looks to be way faster then Wine Let's Hope hmm itune's on Linux Will Be Epic

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Ghent
    Posts
    207

    Cool syscall translation kernel module for linux?

    Something I really would like is a syscall translator like the one on several of the BSDs that can run binaries from the other BSDs, Linux and Solaris/Illumos. That way I could run a vanilla BSD or Illumos in a chroot on Linux. Would be pretty cool...

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    It still helps for testing when you want to write software that runs on OSX natively, while you use Linux.



    You can not port what you don't have the source for. With an emulation layer, at least you can run it regardless dev's will to port it.
    And thats why this initiative is more damaging than useful to Linux ecosystem because it will create illusion that it will run OSX proprietary programs. Just look at Wine it still fails even for some old programs the situation is much worse for new programs

    Consider this OSX user will switch to Linux because he hates NSA spying naturally he will try to transplant his old proprietary programs and he will fail because this emulation will never be as reliable as native programs so hell get annoyed and hell return to OSX

    What we should really do is to port free software from OSX to Linux not port proprietary SW from which will never work because it is moving target and you cannot support properly because its sources are not available.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    184

    Default

    10 characters
    Last edited by Ramiliez; 07-13-2013 at 02:09 PM. Reason: double post

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ramiliez View Post
    And thats why this initiative is more damaging than useful to Linux ecosystem because it will create illusion that it will run OSX proprietary programs. Just look at Wine it still fails even for some old programs the situation is much worse for new programs

    Consider this OSX user will switch to Linux because he hates NSA spying naturally he will try to transplant his old proprietary programs and he will fail because this emulation will never be as reliable as native programs so hell get annoyed and hell return to OSX

    What we should really do is to port free software from OSX to Linux not port proprietary SW from which will never work because it is moving target and you cannot support properly because its sources are not available.
    I'm finding your comments really hard to justify - you're basically hating on something that has no downside of existing. That's like saying "pepper doesn't go well with as many foods as salt so restaurants should stop putting it out for customers". While pepper might not taste as good and doesn't go well with as many foods, it's not hurting anybody for restaurants to include it to their tables.

    I wouldn't say Darling is damaging to the Linux ecosystem either. Most people who hate linux are the people who switched because of compiz and wine. When you're using linux as a free and fancy alternative to windows, you're gonna have a bad time. Think of it like this - people who switch to linux because of the "illusion that it will run OSX programs" likely would not have ever switched to linux for any other reason. If Darling happens to fail at everything the user expects to do, linux doesn't gain or lose anything. It might get some additional flak, but it'd be flak that would be going to other people who had no intention to switch either. So really, Darling doesn't hurt the linux ecosystem at all.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    435

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Seems rather uninteresting.

    Any OS X software of importance already exists for Windows too, so you can use Wine for that.
    OS X have small market share, so not many applications.
    Most OS X applications seem to be proprietary and commercial too, so pretty boring.
    Most have good Linux alternatives anyways.
    OS X is the second most common desktop OS in the globe. Sorry, but I sure as hell don't want hacked OS X apps running on Linux. I have OS X to run them well. Any attempt to port the necessary parts into GNUStep lost momentum a decade ago.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,473

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ramiliez View Post
    What we should really do is to port free software from OSX to Linux not port proprietary SW from which will never work because it is moving target and you cannot support properly because its sources are not available.
    Are there any free open source software on OS X that aren't on Linux?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    I'm finding your comments really hard to justify - you're basically hating on something that has no downside of existing. That's like saying "pepper doesn't go well with as many foods as salt so restaurants should stop putting it out for customers". While pepper might not taste as good and doesn't go well with as many foods, it's not hurting anybody for restaurants to include it to their tables.

    I wouldn't say Darling is damaging to the Linux ecosystem either. Most people who hate linux are the people who switched because of compiz and wine. When you're using linux as a free and fancy alternative to windows, you're gonna have a bad time. Think of it like this - people who switch to linux because of the "illusion that it will run OSX programs" likely would not have ever switched to linux for any other reason. If Darling happens to fail at everything the user expects to do, linux doesn't gain or lose anything. It might get some additional flak, but it'd be flak that would be going to other people who had no intention to switch either. So really, Darling doesn't hurt the linux ecosystem at all.
    Yes you are right its authors right to waste his time as he sees fit but it will not change basic fact that Darling will suck for reasons i stated above

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ramiliez View Post
    Yes you are right its authors right to waste his time as he sees fit but it will not change basic fact that Darling will suck for reasons i stated above
    I don't think it'll suck anywhere near as much as you think. As stated before, Mac and Linux are both POSIX, they both use OpenGL, they are both highly 64-bit optimized, and so on. Comparing Linux to Windows is like apples to oranges, whereas comparing Linux to Mac is like comparing limes to oranges. Obviously there'll be some performance loss but even Wine has had performance improvements over Windows once in a while. Free-BSD is probably a better platform to start with since that is more closely related to Mac. On the other hand, it's graphically inferior to Linux, and Mac is a very graphic intensive OS.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •