Re: Macports On Pure Darwin
El feb 17, 2551 BE, a las 07:34, Michael Franz escribió:
I may have misspoke, I am using just darwin, I forgot that there is a puredarwin project. That is not what I am using.
There is a puredarwin project?! what's the difference with darwin? ...I thought there was only OpenDarwin and another darwin distro, but I don't remember puredarwin. Or is puredarwin some Macports-only variable? Esteban Barahona http://www.anagami.net
It is very new. I don't have any details on it. http://www.puredarwin.org/ On Feb 17, 2008 1:00 PM, Esteban Barahona <esteban.barahona@gmail.com> wrote:
El feb 17, 2551 BE, a las 07:34, Michael Franz escribió:
I may have misspoke, I am using just darwin, I forgot that there is a puredarwin project. That is not what I am using.
There is a puredarwin project?! what's the difference with darwin? ...I thought there was only OpenDarwin and another darwin distro, but I don't remember puredarwin. Or is puredarwin some Macports-only variable?
Esteban Barahona http://www.anagami.net
Given that they haven't posted any updates to their site in over a year, it's probably fair to say that it's mostly just a domain name at this point. This topic was, in any case, hashed out rather thoroughly back when the project changed its name from DarwinPorts to MacPorts. GIven the plethora of projects already devoted to multi-platform ports collections (portage, pkgsrc, etc) and the relative shortage of contributors just on one platform (MacOSX), it was decided to focus on providing the best possible experience for MacOSX, anything else being considered a distraction. - Jordan On Feb 17, 2008, at 10:55 AM, Michael Franz wrote:
It is very new. I don't have any details on it. http://www.puredarwin.org/
On Feb 17, 2008 1:00 PM, Esteban Barahona <esteban.barahona@gmail.com> wrote: El feb 17, 2551 BE, a las 07:34, Michael Franz escribió:
I may have misspoke, I am using just darwin, I forgot that there is a puredarwin project. That is not what I am using.
There is a puredarwin project?! what's the difference with darwin? ...I thought there was only OpenDarwin and another darwin distro, but I don't remember puredarwin. Or is puredarwin some Macports-only variable?
Esteban Barahona http://www.anagami.net
_______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
This topic was, in any case, hashed out rather thoroughly back when the project changed its name from DarwinPorts to MacPorts. GIven the plethora of projects already devoted to multi-platform ports collections (portage, pkgsrc, etc) and the relative shortage of contributors just on one platform (MacOSX), it was decided to focus on providing the best possible experience for MacOSX, anything else being considered a distraction.
MacPorts is still reasonably portable, it's just that it makes more sense to try it with living platforms (like FreeBSD or GNU/Linux) for portability purposes than to try it with dead ones like Darwin OS - at least to me. If one wanted to use for instance Darwin 8.0.1 for some reason, then one could use an archive version of DarwinPorts (like 1.2 that I used) to aid in that archeological excavation - you probably wouldn't need MacPorts 1.6 The project doesn't seem to have decided yet whether it wants to provide the best possible Mac OS X experience, or whether it wants to e.g. provide its own bootstrap versions of all the required system libraries and binaries ? So currently other operating systems are tolerated, as long as they a) provide the necessary requirements, such as Tcl and Foundation and b) don't get in the way of the Mac development, and the platform variants should handle that. Somehow I have the nagging feeling that a pure "Mac" Ports would be more gooey and binary, but that's just me... --anders
On Feb 17, 2008, at 2:42 PM, Anders F Björklund wrote:
The project doesn't seem to have decided yet whether it wants to provide the best possible Mac OS X experience, or whether it wants to e.g. provide its own bootstrap versions of all the required system libraries and binaries ?
The two are not mutually exclusive. MacPorts provides its own bootstrap versions in order to better control the overall experience. - Jordan
El feb 17, 2551 BE, a las 15:01, Jordan K. Hubbard escribió:
This topic was, in any case, hashed out rather thoroughly back when the project changed its name from DarwinPorts to MacPorts. GIven the plethora of projects already devoted to multi-platform ports collections (portage, pkgsrc, etc) and the relative shortage of contributors just on one platform (MacOSX), it was decided to focus on providing the best possible experience for MacOSX, anything else being considered a distraction.
- Jordan
That may be the main objective, but why not also support darwin without the propietary parts of Mac OS X? As I understand it, if it runs on Darwin it must run on Mac OS X... but I guess it's CLI-only apps... Esteban Barahona http://www.anagami.net
On Feb 17, 2008, at 7:40 PM, Esteban Barahona wrote:
That may be the main objective, but why not also support darwin without the propietary parts of Mac OS X? As I understand it, if it runs on Darwin it must run on Mac OS X... but I guess it's CLI-only apps...
Because it's more work (just being at the CLI doesn't mean MacOSX technologies can't easily become dependencies) for pretty much no gain. Darwin as a stand-alone OS is dead and has been dead for enough years now that there's just no point in supporting it. - Jordan
El feb 17, 2551 BE, a las 21:49, Jordan K. Hubbard escribió:
On Feb 17, 2008, at 7:40 PM, Esteban Barahona wrote:
That may be the main objective, but why not also support darwin without the propietary parts of Mac OS X? As I understand it, if it runs on Darwin it must run on Mac OS X... but I guess it's CLI-only apps...
Because it's more work (just being at the CLI doesn't mean MacOSX technologies can't easily become dependencies) for pretty much no gain. Darwin as a stand-alone OS is dead and has been dead for enough years now that there's just no point in supporting it.
- Jordan
There has being ~3 attempts to make a 100% FOSS Darwin distro, or to bring the concept from the dead... the interest is there... but I agree in that MacPorts should support Darwin once it's more mature (as a stand-alone OS). Esteban Barahona http://www.anagami.net
Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
The project doesn't seem to have decided yet whether it wants to provide the best possible Mac OS X experience, or whether it wants to e.g. provide its own bootstrap versions of all the required system libraries and binaries ?
The two are not mutually exclusive. MacPorts provides its own bootstrap versions in order to better control the overall experience.
The current experience on Tiger is pretty decent, but the experience on Leopard is not so great (yet). Not saying the two are exclusive, but a recurring question is why one should use the outdated and outfeatured versions provided by MacPorts instead of using the updated and customized ones available from the new System ? (some examples here being Python and Ruby) Of course this could also be fixed by updating the ports, at least for the +darwin_9 platform. But it does raise the question why it is trying so hard to not use the system libraries and binaries*, if only catering for the latest and greatest releases from Apple anyway ? So as long as those other platforms provide necessary requirements, I think they should be allowed still... * as per the FAQ http://trac.macports.org/projects/macports/wiki/ FAQ#WhyisMacPortsusingitsownlibraries --anders
Le 08-02-18 à 07:52, Anders F Björklund a écrit :
Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
The project doesn't seem to have decided yet whether it wants to provide the best possible Mac OS X experience, or whether it wants to e.g. provide its own bootstrap versions of all the required system libraries and binaries ?
The two are not mutually exclusive. MacPorts provides its own bootstrap versions in order to better control the overall experience.
The current experience on Tiger is pretty decent, but the experience on Leopard is not so great (yet).
Not saying the two are exclusive, but a recurring question is why one should use the outdated and outfeatured versions provided by MacPorts instead of using the updated and customized ones available from the new System ? (some examples here being Python and Ruby) Of course this could also be fixed by updating the ports, at least for the +darwin_9 platform. But it does raise the question why it is trying so hard to not use the system libraries and binaries*, if only catering for the latest and greatest releases from Apple anyway ? So as long as those other platforms provide necessary requirements, I think they should be allowed still...
They sure might provide theses requirements, but for how long ? Is it worth it when you will have to force rebuild every single port because Leopard's libxml is outdated ? As for the customized frameworks, it may make some sense. yves
Yves de Champlain wrote:
So as long as those other platforms provide necessary requirements, I think they should be allowed still...
They sure might provide theses requirements, but for how long ? Is it worth it when you will have to force rebuild every single port because Leopard's libxml is outdated ?
Sorry, you lost me ? I meant other platforms as in Darwin or FreeBSD, and requirements as in Tcl or Foundation. Not as in libz or libxml... --anders
participants (5)
-
Anders F Björklund
-
Esteban Barahona
-
Jordan K. Hubbard
-
Michael Franz
-
Yves de Champlain