From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 12 20:16:51 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77E76947 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 20:16:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ozzie.tundraware.com (ozzie.tundraware.com [75.145.138.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 238B0BE9 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 20:16:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (viper.tundraware.com [192.168.0.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by ozzie.tundraware.com (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s2CKBg4H090709 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:11:42 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from tundra@tundraware.com) Message-ID: <5320BF7E.3050106@tundraware.com> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:11:42 -0500 From: Tim Daneliuk User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: If the BSD become known as Linux, BSD distributions will be millions just like there are on Linux? References: <1d8501cf3e17$d83e5f90$88bb1eb0$@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (ozzie.tundraware.com [75.145.138.73]); Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:11:42 -0500 (CDT) X-TundraWare-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-TundraWare-MailScanner-ID: s2CKBg4H090709 X-TundraWare-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-TundraWare-MailScanner-From: tundra@tundraware.com X-Spam-Status: No X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 20:16:51 -0000 On 03/12/2014 12:30 PM, Chad Leigh Shire.Net LLC wrote: > > On Mar 12, 2014, at 11:23 AM, dteske@FreeBSD.org wrote: > >> >> But let's take a step back for a moment... >> >> Apple's Mac OS X is based on BSD and has a wider install base than Linux. So >> in that respect, BSD is already doing great. > > OS X is not based on BSD. It is a mach based kernel, Mach is not a kernel. It is a micro-kernel designed to *host* full kernels. > with a custom graphical interface unrelated to X Windows. That part is only sort of true. It is possible to run X programs under Aqua. > It does have a BSD type user land available, and a BSD type kernel interface to enable the user land. > It is more correct, I think, to say that OS X and BSD share some heritage. > > Chad Well considering that major parts of OSX initially came from FBSD 4.x and that includes the kernel itself as well as much of the support infrastructure, I think this is fundamentally incorrect. OTOH, OSX isn't really BSD any more (to the extent it ever was). It's best described - I think - as "derived from FreeBSD" because they've changed things like filesystem case sensitivity, they us HPFS instead of FFS/UFS/XFS, the filesystem layout is different, and so forth. They've also added a bunch of Apple-specific APIs. As to what is userland and not, I think this is kind of a moot thing these days. I happily move across userlands on OS/X, Redhat, Debian, AIX, FreeBSD, and so on with very little cognitive shift. The biggest differences among these are the tools (like compilers) and locations/layouts for the aforementioned system admin and control files. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Daneliuk tundra@tundraware.com PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/