The Wikipedia BSD article is good (and accords with my own understanding, for what that’s worth). It says that Darwin, the system on which Apple’s Mac OS X is built, is a derivative of 4.4BSD-Lite2 and FreeBSD, and notes that 4.4BSD is the last release that Berkeley was involved with.
So, Darwin is as BSD as you can get (just like all the other BSDs!). OS X refers to those parts of the distribution which aren’t open-source, principally the GUI, but including a variety of frameworks, and anything which relies on these won’t be portable.
OS X as a whole is a UNIX 03 system. That’s equivalent to being a truly POSIX-compliant system (as opposed to being POSIX-like).
As other answers have noted, the userland parts of the OS are unsurprising to anyone with much unix experience, and I’ve rarely had any difficulty building portable-unix software on OS X.
In contrast, the non-userland parts of the OS are pretty different. Apple seems to be willing to innovate in those areas fairly cheerfully. I think (but I’m not positive) that these changes are formally part of Darwin. One of the most obvious differences is that launchd has replaced cron, at, inetd, and much of the startup infrastructure.
….But go ahead and tell us how mac and open source is antithetical
Edit: for the downvoters, yes Apple has had their hands in open source from the start and never stopped. Doesn’t mean they’re the goddamn FOSS Jesus
Open source software is at the heart of Apple platforms and developer tools. Apple manages the following projects and encourages your contribution.
Incorporating parts from a free and open-source Unix-like operating system does not make your OS FOSS. Apple would be the last company to contribute their MacOS source code.
You missed the point of my comment which was open source is not antithetical to Apple and it’s not absurd to use a mac to work on open source software.
To imply it is absurd to believe in open source and use a mac as part of development is fucking ridiculous. As I said in my comment open source has always had a place at Apple both historically and currently.
I used the FreeBSD connection to illustrate how open source is at the core of Apple sw. We don’t have to use that as an example though:
Open source software is at the heart of Apple platforms and developer tools. Apple manages the following projects and encourages your contribution.
As a hardware hacker, I’ve experienced Apple’s anti-FLOSS behavior. I was there when Apple was trying to discourage iPodLinux. In contrast, when we wanted to upstream support for the Didj, LeapFrog gave us documentation and their kernel hackers joined our IRC channel. It’s the same reason that people prefer ATI/AMD to nVidia, literally anybody to Broadcom, etc.
Your “entire fucking point” is obvious from the top-level comment you replied to; you’ve taken offense to somebody pointing out that writing FLOSS on Apple hardware is oxymoronic. And it’s a bad point, given that such a FLOSS hacker is going to use Homebrew or Nix in order to get a decent userland that hasn’t been nerfed repeatedly by an owner with a GPLv3 allergy and a fetish for controlling filesystem layouts. Darwin is a weird exception, not one of the easy-to-handle BSDs.
Also, what, are you not anti-Apple? Do you really think that a fashion company is going to reward you for being fake-angry on Lemmy?
You missed the point of my comment which was open source is not antithetical to Apple and it’s not absurd to use a mac to work on open source software.
so your argument is that apple doesn’t actively oppress your ability to program? And that it supports open source because it leeched off free bsd?
are you actually stupid, or are you on the apple payroll?
Supporting open source involves contributing to the amount of software available by open sourcing your own work.
OSX is not simply the non open source pieces, I get reading comprehension is hard for you but come on. People will upvote anything if it confirms their emotional biases lol
The entire internet is built on open-source technologies, as you probably know. That doesn’t make the internet as a whole an open-source thing. Transport technologies are open, a lot of hardware and software around it is not, and that’s still talking about the infrastructure, not what is actually running on top of all that.
It’s like saying Windows is open-source because they use curl. And Microsoft is as open to open-source code as long as they can train their LLM on it and sell it to you. Sure they provide money and developers to some projects, but Windows, Office, Azure will most likely never be actually open to code investigations, forget free.
Yes, Apple, like many other corporations, uses FOSS components in their closed source software because it saves them money from free labor. There are also parts that make sense for them to distribute under a free license because they need developers to implement them in their software to work with their OS or browser.
That doesn’t mean they’re actually benefitting the FOSS community in any way, it just means the FOSS community is benefitting their closed source software for free.
That’s not true for all of their projects, that whole ass list is absolutely not just stuff that use FOSS. They openly welcome contributions but you don’t know that because you didn’t actually look at what I provided.
My entire goddamn point is that it is NOT antithetical to use a Mac to write foss. How does your response relate to that AT ALL??
Its about Mac OS itself being proprietary, even though it certain part is foss. Apple do manage foss projects but you know, google, facebook and microsoft does that too. They defenitely need foss and do promote in some ways. And all theese are stupid dramas like “Microsoft<3Linux”
How exactly does that show that open source is antithetical to Apple? Is that whole ass list I provided at the end of my comment just a 2 bullet point of osx, iOS???
No it’s not, so please actually read what you are emotionally reacting to first.
Actually the mac OS is built in part with freeBSD. Open source nix has always had a place at Apple, but Apple greedy and bad right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD
Here’s a good breakdown: https://stackoverflow.com/a/3449195
….But go ahead and tell us how mac and open source is antithetical
Edit: for the downvoters, yes Apple has had their hands in open source from the start and never stopped. Doesn’t mean they’re the goddamn FOSS Jesus
https://opensource.apple.com/projects/
Incorporating parts from a free and open-source Unix-like operating system does not make your OS FOSS. Apple would be the last company to contribute their MacOS source code.
You missed the point of my comment which was open source is not antithetical to Apple and it’s not absurd to use a mac to work on open source software.
To imply it is absurd to believe in open source and use a mac as part of development is fucking ridiculous. As I said in my comment open source has always had a place at Apple both historically and currently.
I used the FreeBSD connection to illustrate how open source is at the core of Apple sw. We don’t have to use that as an example though:
https://opensource.apple.com/projects/
As I said in my original comment, it is not antithetical to use a mac to dev FOSS. I’m not saying Apple is the goddamn FOSS Jesus
You’re cheering for exploitation of a commons.
No im not cheering about anything, my entire fucking point is Apple is not antithetical to open source.
It’s that goddamn simple, it your making some sort of fan boy anti Apple war out of this and it’s honestly pathetic.
As a hardware hacker, I’ve experienced Apple’s anti-FLOSS behavior. I was there when Apple was trying to discourage iPodLinux. In contrast, when we wanted to upstream support for the Didj, LeapFrog gave us documentation and their kernel hackers joined our IRC channel. It’s the same reason that people prefer ATI/AMD to nVidia, literally anybody to Broadcom, etc.
Your “entire fucking point” is obvious from the top-level comment you replied to; you’ve taken offense to somebody pointing out that writing FLOSS on Apple hardware is oxymoronic. And it’s a bad point, given that such a FLOSS hacker is going to use Homebrew or Nix in order to get a decent userland that hasn’t been nerfed repeatedly by an owner with a GPLv3 allergy and a fetish for controlling filesystem layouts. Darwin is a weird exception, not one of the easy-to-handle BSDs.
Also, what, are you not anti-Apple? Do you really think that a fashion company is going to reward you for being fake-angry on Lemmy?
so your argument is that apple doesn’t actively oppress your ability to program? And that it supports open source because it leeched off free bsd?
are you actually stupid, or are you on the apple payroll?
Supporting open source involves contributing to the amount of software available by open sourcing your own work.
Leeching off open source software is not support
From your own quote
OSX is not simply the non open source pieces, I get reading comprehension is hard for you but come on. People will upvote anything if it confirms their emotional biases lol
The entire internet is built on open-source technologies, as you probably know. That doesn’t make the internet as a whole an open-source thing. Transport technologies are open, a lot of hardware and software around it is not, and that’s still talking about the infrastructure, not what is actually running on top of all that.
It’s like saying Windows is open-source because they use curl. And Microsoft is as open to open-source code as long as they can train their LLM on it and sell it to you. Sure they provide money and developers to some projects, but Windows, Office, Azure will most likely never be actually open to code investigations, forget free.
Yes.
So brave for hating a brand because they price up.
Can’t be using anything that costs money when you believe and/or work in open source right? Because that’s the joke my comment is responding to
Yes, Apple, like many other corporations, uses FOSS components in their closed source software because it saves them money from free labor. There are also parts that make sense for them to distribute under a free license because they need developers to implement them in their software to work with their OS or browser.
That doesn’t mean they’re actually benefitting the FOSS community in any way, it just means the FOSS community is benefitting their closed source software for free.
Windows is a free and open source software, it incorporates open source components.
Nowhere did I say that mac os is open source, all I said is mac and open source are not antithetical.
Furthermore
https://opensource.apple.com/projects/
They, fuckin’, use, FOSS. But they use it by wrapping their proprietaty stuff they need. Just taking the free labour from foss devs
That’s not true for all of their projects, that whole ass list is absolutely not just stuff that use FOSS. They openly welcome contributions but you don’t know that because you didn’t actually look at what I provided.
My entire goddamn point is that it is NOT antithetical to use a Mac to write foss. How does your response relate to that AT ALL??
Its about Mac OS itself being proprietary, even though it certain part is foss. Apple do manage foss projects but you know, google, facebook and microsoft does that too. They defenitely need foss and do promote in some ways. And all theese are stupid dramas like “Microsoft<3Linux”
Is osx / iOS itself open source?
How exactly does that show that open source is antithetical to Apple? Is that whole ass list I provided at the end of my comment just a 2 bullet point of osx, iOS???
No it’s not, so please actually read what you are emotionally reacting to first.
https://lemmy.world/comment/10326685