What is it?
- Thread starter Paul C
- Start date
btoneill
keeper of the cheese
It's not a stupid question. Darwin is the underlying core of OS X. Darwin is based on FreeBSD which is a free BSD UNIX variant. Basically if you took away all the GUI stuff from OS X (which is called Quartz) you'd be left with just command line access to the OS, which is the Darwin portion.
The easiest way to think of this (overly simplified) is to look at the way Windows 3.x worked. Windows 3.x ran on top of DOS. You could run DOS alone, with just the command line, or you could use the GUI which was windows, but you couldn't run Windows without DOS, as DOS was the core. (Ofcourse, technically this isn't completely true, but thats way beyond this scope)
Basically, what was done with OS X is the core of the OS was split apart from the GUI, this is a "Good Thing(tm)" as it protects the core running of the computer from things that happen in userland (aka the GUI). You can completely crash Quartz/Aqua so all you see is a pretty grey screen, or a frozen desktop, but you're still able to access the OS remotely by using ssh or telnet. Also services such as the web and file serving will still work for people accessing the box.
Hope this helps some.
Brian
The easiest way to think of this (overly simplified) is to look at the way Windows 3.x worked. Windows 3.x ran on top of DOS. You could run DOS alone, with just the command line, or you could use the GUI which was windows, but you couldn't run Windows without DOS, as DOS was the core. (Ofcourse, technically this isn't completely true, but thats way beyond this scope)
Basically, what was done with OS X is the core of the OS was split apart from the GUI, this is a "Good Thing(tm)" as it protects the core running of the computer from things that happen in userland (aka the GUI). You can completely crash Quartz/Aqua so all you see is a pretty grey screen, or a frozen desktop, but you're still able to access the OS remotely by using ssh or telnet. Also services such as the web and file serving will still work for people accessing the box.
Hope this helps some.
Brian
I dont like Aqua , it makes Mac BSD really confusing to use .
Dos kernel didnt have all the functions of the BSD kernel . The GNU software wasnt easily available for DOS as it is for BSD/Linux .
The difference between DOS and Darwin is that the mach kernel is much more complex in sturcuture and preformace . The shells available for use with the generic darwin kernel are as well much more complex than the DOS shell .
You can learn to use DOS at home in a few months but BSD takes years and it is adviseable to join a study group or take night courses to master BSD systems .
Dos kernel didnt have all the functions of the BSD kernel . The GNU software wasnt easily available for DOS as it is for BSD/Linux .
The difference between DOS and Darwin is that the mach kernel is much more complex in sturcuture and preformace . The shells available for use with the generic darwin kernel are as well much more complex than the DOS shell .
You can learn to use DOS at home in a few months but BSD takes years and it is adviseable to join a study group or take night courses to master BSD systems .
I switched over from DOS to BSD/UNIX .
BSD systems is a mathematical journey into enlightenment .
I wish OS X had a setup system like SuSE Linux or Free BSD for managing ports and packages , sysinstall and yast rule .
Dont let Darwin get to ya , I dont do much besides surf the internet with it and such .
There are some great intro books on OS X and Darwin , just realise that Darwin and Free BSD and Linux are all the same except they have different kernels that run the fucntions of the operating system but they are all UNIX filesystem . The shell is what you use to access the UNIX filesystem from a command prompt .
CMD is a copy of UNIX filesystem so when you get your OS X together you will have a better understanding of NT filesystem .
My advice is if you want to get your Darwin together look into C programming .
BSD systems is a mathematical journey into enlightenment .
I wish OS X had a setup system like SuSE Linux or Free BSD for managing ports and packages , sysinstall and yast rule .
Dont let Darwin get to ya , I dont do much besides surf the internet with it and such .
There are some great intro books on OS X and Darwin , just realise that Darwin and Free BSD and Linux are all the same except they have different kernels that run the fucntions of the operating system but they are all UNIX filesystem . The shell is what you use to access the UNIX filesystem from a command prompt .
CMD is a copy of UNIX filesystem so when you get your OS X together you will have a better understanding of NT filesystem .
My advice is if you want to get your Darwin together look into C programming .
Vard
Looking for progress
While we're on the subject of newbies and people that know nothing about the Unix side of OS X..I have 2 questions..
First--Is Fink hard to install and does it take a Genius (or at least a programer) to know what the hell to do with it?
I am interested in looking into some of the ported software out there that hasn't quite made it to Aqua...
However, If I mess up the Mac, my wife is gonna shoot me...
Second--I have a buddyback in Minneapolis (whose name happens to be Brian, but it's not you btoneill) that told me that OS X is NOT in fact a TRUE Unix. He went on to say that Linux isn't either. I don't care one way or the other, just wondering what he meant by this.
Thanks for any of the help you can give.
First--Is Fink hard to install and does it take a Genius (or at least a programer) to know what the hell to do with it?
I am interested in looking into some of the ported software out there that hasn't quite made it to Aqua...
However, If I mess up the Mac, my wife is gonna shoot me...
Second--I have a buddyback in Minneapolis (whose name happens to be Brian, but it's not you btoneill) that told me that OS X is NOT in fact a TRUE Unix. He went on to say that Linux isn't either. I don't care one way or the other, just wondering what he meant by this.
Thanks for any of the help you can give.
I have no idea what a "true Unix" is. Perhaps he means the "One True Unix," which is of course the one developed at AT&T/Bell Labs. Frankly, the whole topic is too religious, and you're right to be ambivalent.
So anyhow, about Fink. Get it. Try it. It won't be as easy as drag-installing Explorer, but it's really not all that hard. The included "dselect" utility makes it a joy to use, and if you prefer an Aqua interface then try FinkCommander.
In short, nothing on your computer will be harmed by installing Fink, and if you decide it's not fun or valuable you can just delete the /sw directory and it's gone, gone, gone! (well, almost gone, cuz you might have some dross in your /Library/StartupItems folder if you mess with "daemonic.")
So anyhow, about Fink. Get it. Try it. It won't be as easy as drag-installing Explorer, but it's really not all that hard. The included "dselect" utility makes it a joy to use, and if you prefer an Aqua interface then try FinkCommander.
In short, nothing on your computer will be harmed by installing Fink, and if you decide it's not fun or valuable you can just delete the /sw directory and it's gone, gone, gone! (well, almost gone, cuz you might have some dross in your /Library/StartupItems folder if you mess with "daemonic.")
btoneill
keeper of the cheese
First: fink is easy to install, there is also FinkCommander which is a GUI interface to fink that makes it even simpler to use. http://fink.sourceforge.net and http://finkcommander.sourceforge.net, as to messing up you computer, don't worry to much about that, fink installs everything under /sw which is not used by any stock OS X stuff, it creates it's own tree and puts all it's data there. Shouldn't touch anything that apple put in.
Second: As to if it's UNIX or not, that depends, if you're looking at it from a legal standpoint of using the UNIX name, it is not, but neither is linux, BSDi, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, or a host of others, you can get a list at http://www.opengroup.org/regproducts/company.htm of companies that have requested, and been given use of the UNIX trademark. As to Apple calling OS X "Unix based" the Open Group sees enough similarity between OS X and the UNIX 98 specification as to not confuse buyers, so it does not enforce the copyright. Now, if you wanted to sell DOS and call it "UNIX based" that would get a full brunt of legal problems coming from the Open Group as it would easily confuse buyers as to what UNIX is, and would hurt the power of the trademark to those who legally use it.
Brian, "the true Brian"
