Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Unix Operating Systems Software Businesses OS X Apple

Darwin 8.0.1 Available 55

Posted by timothy
from the keeps-evolving dept.
An anonymous reader writes "It seems that Apple's finally released binary versions of Darwin 8.0.1 for both PowerPC and x86 (Apple ID required to download from Apple mirrors). ISO (for x86) and CDR (for PowerPC) images are available for download. This comes a few weeks after Apple posted source code for Darwin 8, which you can get from here."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Darwin 8.0.1 Available

Comments Filter:
  • Finally! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by poopdeville (841677) on Tuesday May 10, 2005 @09:26PM (#12494699)
    I can afford Tiger!

    Oh, wait....


    Seriously, does anyone know if it would be difficult to swap out the Darwin component of Panther with Darwin 8?
  • Intel? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by sootman (158191)
    I tried Darwin on Intel earlier this year on a 1 GHz Athlon and was amazed at how slow it was. Like, typing 'ls /' gave output at a rate of a couple lines per second. I'm not exaggerating, it was like what you get when you run 'ls' against a floppy. What kind of experience have others had? Has anyone installed Darwin on Intel and wound up with a usable box? It's entirely possible something went wrong for me, or I did something wrong myself, but I want to see what it's been like for others before I go around
    • A friend of mine tried it about a year ago, and while I don't remember his exact comments, I don't remember him saying anything about slowness.
    • Intel? (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Please don't refer to the x86 platform as "Intel."

      Jesus, man, you're an AMD user.
    • I downloaded OpenDarwin 7.2.1 earlier this year and tried it on two iMacs and a 700MHz Duron with 382MB of RAM -- I think the latter, or the CD drive speed, might have made the difference. I have not installed and *used* Darwin on any machine as yet (no boot loader is installed by default), though I plan to when I get another hard drive for another mac.
    • one of my friends installed Darwin a couple years ago (version 6, maybe?) back when it was first released for x86 and his main complaint was that it didn't work like linux. Also, iirc, he had some issues compiling programs, but he didn't say anything about it being slow.

      i had it installed on a 450mhz G3 as a headless server before I decided I wanted to use an external firewire drive and couldn't figure out how to mount it, so I switched to Jaguar (not server).

      when it was on the G3, it ran great.
    • The kernel was built with SSE (intel-only) optimizations.
    • Re:Intel? (Score:5, Informative)

      by lpontiac (173839) on Wednesday May 11, 2005 @01:19AM (#12496126)
      Not that Darwin on x86 is a speed demon, but I think you'll find the slow 'ls /' is actually just the framebuffer driver.
    • I tried Darwin on Intel earlier this year on a 1 GHz Athlon and was amazed at how slow it was. Like, typing 'ls /' gave output at a rate of a couple lines per second. I'm not exaggerating, it was like what you get when you run 'ls' against a floppy. What kind of experience have others had?

      Well, it took me 17 minutes to copy a 40MB file. 17 minutes!!! Netcraft even confirms it! ;-)
  • What is this? this is ridiculous. My current up to date tiger Mac is only on darwin 8.0.0 and now they are giving away free 8.0.1? Wake up Apple some people are paying you to get products, not to pay for lagging behind. Fair enough if its the same version but I dont see any 8.0.1 in Tiger anywhere soon??? :angry:
    • by keeleysam (792221) on Tuesday May 10, 2005 @09:45PM (#12494795) Homepage Journal
      You will get it with 10.4.1 due in less than a month. Its like this is in Debian unstable right now. When you get it it will be like testing.
    • Why don't you see this as a indication of the imminent release of 10.4.1? ;)
      • Well I think it should be the other way around. paying members should get the update first and then leave it to be downloaded later. Or maybe on the same day, but not put people who pay for an operating system on the backburner when free things go first.,
        • 8.0.1 is not 10.4.1

          It may include some or most of the *kernel* changes in 10.4.1, but you're not missing out on anything except a chance to do some extra beta-testing to help the "paying customers" get a better product.
    • You're drinking too much coffee. ;-)

      I'm sure 10.4.1 is a week or two out. Unlike today's Darwin release, it will have the benefit of wider testing.

      No "lagging" here. Go play with your widgets for a while and enjoy your new OS. The next point release will be available when Apple thinks it's ready for production machines.

    • by mgaiman (151782)
      I would assume that Darwin 8.0.1 is just a fix for Darwin itself. Darwin 8.1.x will correspond to MacOS X 10.4.1. (Just as Darwin 7.9 corresponded to MacOSX 103.9.)
    • What is this? this is ridiculous. My current up to date tiger Mac is only on darwin 8.0.0 and now they are giving away free 8.0.1? Wake up Apple some people are paying you to get products, not to pay for lagging behind.

      You didn't pay for Darwin 8.0.0 -- you paid for all the stuff built on top of it. I sincerely doubt there's anything in this release that you're missing out on.

      I recommend calming the fuck down.
    • Darwin 8.0.1 is Darwin 8.0.0 with some/most of the Carbon/Cocoa dependencies stripped out. Apple has to make some modifications to Darwin to get it to compile and boot without all the "other" libraries.

      When 10.4.1 is released, it will ship with Darwin 8.1.0. When they do a Darwin only release, you'll then see Darwin 8.1.1, etc.

      Nothing to see here....
  • What benefits are there to running Darwin on x86 as opposed to Linux or any other BSD?
    • What benefits are there to running Darwin on x86 as opposed to Linux or any other BSD?

      Chicks dig scars.
    • by Temporal (96070) on Wednesday May 11, 2005 @03:41AM (#12496699) Journal
      Well, it is a microkernel, if you're into that. It has kqueue() and AIO, which make it better than Linux (although Linux did finally get around to adding full AIO a couple months ago; slowpokes), though FreeBSD obviously has had both of those for a long time. Yeah, I guess it's basically a microkernel FreeBSD. You might---- er, excuse me, but there seems to be an angry mob of Linux users outside my door.
      • It also has, I believe, proper HFS+ support. I don't know how valuable this is to you, but an easily searchable (lookup the searchfs system call), metadata-aware FS seems like a strong selling point to me. Not to mention a few nice tweaks like launchd.
    • Re:Innocent Question (Score:3, Informative)

      by MrHanky (141717)
      I tried Darwin (OpenDarwin) on PPC, and couldn't find any benefits to it. OS X is really all about the proprietary stuff Apple put on top. Darwin doesn't even support the compressed disk image files (.dmg) that most software is distributed with (nor does it support Stuffit .sit files, which is the other important archive format for software for Apples -- but you can download that separately as a .dmg file). You can install some software from DarwinPorts, but it's severely broken. I'd expect Fink to work, if
      • Darwin doesn't even support the compressed disk image files (.dmg) that most software is distributed

        I've not used Darwin, but did you look for the hdiutil utility? It is used to manipulate disk images from the terminal in OS X.

        • I know (it took me a fair time to find out when I tested Darwin), but that's the utility that is missing -- probably because it depends on other proprietary software.
  • by sleepypants (599905) on Tuesday May 10, 2005 @11:42PM (#12495610)
    I'm curious about the number of people who run Darwin (but not OS x) on Apple hardware. I have Darwin 8.0 already as part of OS X and see no good reason to strip off the GUI and go "Darwin only". On x86, the hardware compatibility list seems to be woefully short. Is releasing Darwin just a feel-good thing for Apple, to show support for the open-source world? I can't believe it's just PR, yet I can't see the user base being there either. The whole appeal of Macs (at least for me) is to get the nice GUI plus the UNIX underpinning rather than Yet Another UNIX-like distribution in Darwin.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 11, 2005 @02:26AM (#12496424)
      Is releasing Darwin just a feel-good thing for Apple, to show support for the open-source world?

      Kind of. When you consider that with BSD, they don't have to release jack -- it's a pretty nice thing for them to be doing.

      What do they get out of it? Free labor, to some degree. People do actually hack darwin for fun, and Apple gets to incorporate that work into Mac OS X, according the Darwin's license.

      There *isn't* much reason to downgrade from Mac OS X to Darwin-only. But that doesn't mean people won't run it where they can. It's just another verson of BSD, actively hacked-on, and tailored for PPC hardware. If that excites you, go for it, if not, meh -- there's always FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, a million versions of Linux, etc, etc.

      ASOTV can probably knows better. Ask him next time you his his posts.
      • I can see a use for running Darwin only on Mac hardware in a server farm environment where the GUI gets in the way although Apple has done a good job to only have stuff eating processor time when it is actually doing something. If I were going to build a hosting platform on Apple hardware but would be using SSH and other such administration systems I would dump OS X and go for Darwin on its own just to reduce clutter and free up some resources.
    • by mjsottile77 (867906) on Wednesday May 11, 2005 @03:50AM (#12496726)
      I haven't tried it myself, but there are times that it seems a binary compatible UNIX would be nice as an alternative to OSX. Quite often I find myself running plain-old C apps that perform much better and much more consistently if I boot OSX into console mode to disable the GUI infrastructure. It seems a pure darwin compute slave might be slightly more transparent to use than recompiling my code to run on *BSD or an OSX box setup to boot console only. Of course, this is purely speculation - I haven't tried it myself. Anyoe out there tried this?
    • by gidds (56397) <.slashdot. .at. .gidds.me.uk.> on Wednesday May 11, 2005 @08:06AM (#12497586) Homepage
      Darwin's usefulness spreads far wider than just those who use it directly.

      For example, as a Mac OS X user, when I discovered a problem in the MSDOS-format volume handling (specifically, a minor incompatibility with CF cards that had been used on EPOC/Symbian OS), I was able to use the Darwin source to fix it myself. I downloaded and searched the relevant source code, instrumented/recompiled/ran a few user-land programs, found the problem, fixed and tested it, and then submitted it to Apple, who (after a nice chat with one of their engineers) put it into Darwin 7 and Mac OS X 10.3. It was hardly a major change, just 3 or 4 lines IIRC, but I'd not have been able to do it without Darwin's source code.

      • Yeh, for a long time I was able to get the same kind of value from the FreeBSD source tree when I was trying to deal with problems in early versions of Tru64 (Digital UNIX, OSF/1) as a network admin. It's not that you need this stuff that often, but when you need it it makes a BIG difference.
  • by core (3330)
    My sales have dipped a bit starting exactly when people forked out $150 for Tiger (yes, it's worth that much, I know :P) and are playing with the numerous freebies with no money left to buy additional software this month :) (well, it's coming back up now)

    Cartoon mini golf game for Mac: http://www.funpause.com/gardengolf/ [funpause.com]

"Pok pok pok, P'kok!" -- Superchicken

Working...