sHARD>> Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 OSNews is reporting that Apple representative Ernest Prabhakar (of Open Source & Open Standards) has denied the official closing of the Darwin x86 kernel source. Says Mr. Prabhakar: "We continue to release all the Darwin sources for our PowerPC systems, and so far have released all the non-kernel Darwin sources for Intel. Nothing has been announced, so [Tom Yager] (and everyone else) certainly has the right to speculate. But please don't confuse 'speculation' with 'fact'." Tom Yager recently wrote an article about the "closing" of kernel sources due to piracy. View the original post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swad Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 That's really interesting. Especially since he didn't actually clear up what was going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TsubakiSama Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 Sooner or later Apple have to sell OSX86 for PC's they would earn more money that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouch Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 That's very interesting - does this add more fuel to the fire that apple may be thinking of ditching the Mach kernel in 10.5? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scramble Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 Yay! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swad Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 I think the rumors about the 10.5 kernel are really just "we want this to happen" blog posts that have evolved into "we think it will happen." Maybe not, but I don't remember hearing any "insider info" on the topic. They'll have to do something major for virtualization, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacX Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 It's a good think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FullMetal Posted May 22, 2006 Share Posted May 22, 2006 Wundervoll! :):) For a minute there I actually thought they were going to close the source code! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzie123 Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 I think they are closing the kernel. Read between the lines of his statement. He said that they are still releasing non-kernel source code for Intel-based machine. What happened to the kernel source code? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Gil Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 They are obviously planning to close the kernel for Intel machines, that's what they're saying, and quote "We continue to release all the Darwin sources for our PowerPC systems, and so far have released all the non-kernel Darwin sources for Intel." what else do we need to be sure, they key phrase here is "all the non-kernel Darwin sources for Intel" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grunt Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 interesting if they close XNU for Intel, which is partially based on open source BSD kernel(s)? dont they violate GNU GPL at minimum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigxcpu Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 what is the connection between the BSD license and the GPL one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grunt Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 what is the connection between the BSD license and the GPL one? ok I confess I dont know those license details so much in depth, but OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD etc... I read Apple have "borrowed" kernel sources from those open source projects (what ever is thy license, GPL or other). OS X XNU partially old Mach, partially BSD? Edit: http://developer.apple.com/documentation/D..._section_3.html The BSD layer is based on the BSD kernel, primarily FreeBSD. http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fireshark Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 The BSD kernel is based on a BSD license, waaay less restrictive .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grunt Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 The BSD kernel is based on a BSD license, waaay less restrictive .... which means that Apple can take open source, and use it in their closed source without violating the license? Edit: looks like it (http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/license.html): Copyright 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following acknowledgement: This product includes software developed by the University of California, Berkeley and its contributors. 4. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schrepfler Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 It's clean and simple, BSD means you can close your sources whenever you want. As the MacOS is not based on any OS that has the GPL licence it's not in violation with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwhsh8r Posted July 8, 2006 Share Posted July 8, 2006 I hope that they keep it open... max Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts