13-Jun-2024 06:10 GMT.
[News] Mac On Linux can run MACOS XANN.lu
Posted on 08-Sep-2002 16:05 GMT by Christophe Decanini17 comments
View flat
View list
Here are news from the MOL website. It means that we will be able to run MACOS X (over linux) on the AmigaOne or Pegasos. It strengthens these platforms that can run AmigaOS or MorphOS, various versions of Linux, various BSD OS and MACOS X.
List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1kamelito08-Sep-2002 15:15 GMT
Comment 2corpse08-Sep-2002 15:41 GMT
Comment 3Christophe Decanini08-Sep-2002 16:04 GMT
Comment 4Don Cox08-Sep-2002 16:06 GMT
Comment 5Christophe Decanini08-Sep-2002 16:07 GMT
Comment 6Joe "Floid" Kanowitz08-Sep-2002 18:40 GMT
Comment 7coldfire08-Sep-2002 19:16 GMT
Comment 8Don Cox08-Sep-2002 19:23 GMT
Comment 9Kronos08-Sep-2002 19:47 GMT
Mac On Linux can run MACOS X : Comment 10 of 17ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 09-Sep-2002 03:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Don Cox):
Don Cox said,
>No, not being sarcastic. I haven`t touched Linux for over a year, and
>I know nothing at all about Mac-on-Linux. I was wondering if it would
>work (if ported) in the same way as EMPLANT and Fusion - the Mac
>running as one screen amongst the other Amiga screens.
I'm sure someone like Ole-Egil would be more familiar, but from looking at the site, it's the PowerPC equivalent of VMWare- a software VM that takes advantage of hardware's support for self-virtualization to show some semblence of reasonable speed. I'd imagine it'd be a bit of a dog compared to running native, but it's hard to say- how *did* the Amiga Mac emulators of days past manage to run so fast, anyway? (I finally figured out what Petunia means by 'task-based' emulation... did any old emulators manage to modify exec on the fly, perhaps?)
Anyhow, as such, it's one window on X11, just like any other process presenting an X GUI, and that output could be made to fill a virtual desktop, and presumably an Amiga screen were it ported, buuut.. [See below.]
>With Fusion, the Mac virtual hard drive can be mounted as an Amiga
>drive, and accessed through DOpus etc. Would that apply to a ported
Looks like it runs off 'real' Mac partitions, but has support for networking, which should open up a number of possibilities for sharing on the loopback subnet. Of course, Linux might also have native support for HFS/+, I've no clue there as a BSD user.
However... as I was getting ready to say above, it looks to me like 90% of everything- the graphics routines, drivers/virtualizations, and so on would be fairly specific to Linux. I only have a layman's appreciation of the issues involved, but it seems like a 'port' would probably require a lot of modification... enough that it wouldn't be a port, but a separate project. The MOL sources would be a great *reference* - and a good excuse to keep a MacOnAmiga project GPLed - but I imagine any attempt to define an Amiga port in patchsets would require more code in patches than would actually be reused from the base project. That's said from 'common sense;' I can't seem to get to their BitKeeper equivalent of CVSWeb for a cursory glance. ( http://mol.bkserver.net )
>How long before Apple set up the Mac hardware as a dongle for their
Hmm.. I'd like to say "It isn't?," but they've had their years of glasnost after slamming the lid on clones. A better question would be whether they're going to try again- with the new OS so attractive, and the 'Marklar' port supposedly lurking internally... you have to wonder if Apple might want a way out of forcing another architecture switch. By forcing the look'n'feel hand on their hardware (with more success than they've had in software; remember when blue'n'white x86s were successfully verboten?), they're guaranteed some monopoly on style, and anything that drives PowerPC prices is a good thing for them. I'd look out for a crackdown on anyone daring to sell an OS X preload on non-Macs, but perhaps a shrinkwrapped version 3 years down the line if commodity PowerPC 'proves itself' without their help. People are running System 9 on their clones without trouble- http://www.macaddict.com/resources/faq/29077.html - Apple doesn't punish their end-users that often.
Of course, if that proved anything, a lot rides on [the Segway of] Jobs' next mood swing.
Funnily enough, someone I know IRCwards who's been an LKML follower for ages had some words to say on why OS X took the road it did... As a secondhand story, it loses a lot of detail, but it comes down to Apple being interested in Linux- hence the backing of mkLinux- but Linus not being interested in Apple. Was news to me, at least, not having followed that end of things... X probably wouldn't look much different no matter the underlying kernel, but it would've been 'interesting' to see Apple navigate under the GPL.
#11 Ole-Egil
TopPrevious commentNext commentbottom
List of all comments to this article (continued)
Comment 11Ole-Egil09-Sep-2002 03:46 GMT
Comment 12Don Cox09-Sep-2002 07:50 GMT
Comment 13Anonymous09-Sep-2002 11:41 GMT
Comment 14Christophe Decanini09-Sep-2002 13:16 GMT
Comment 15José09-Sep-2002 13:45 GMT
Comment 16strobe09-Sep-2002 18:43 GMT
Comment 17Christophe Decanini11-Sep-2002 23:03 GMT
Back to Top