Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Virtualize OS X on Linux

grodola.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 143 posts

Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux

#71

Post by pjmlp »

pawadu wrote: post #58
pjmlp wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone wants UNIX clones and there are toons of goodies on the OS X stack for doing desktop development for people willing to pay for it.

> Not everyone wants UNIX clones Technically OS X is a "UNIX clone" > and there are toons of goodies on the OS X You mean there is a Clippy for OSX?

> Technically OS X is a "UNIX clone"

Yes it is, but it doesn't share the UNIX culture, rather the GUI culture inherited from the Xerox PARC ideas that impregnated Apple and NeXT.

The UNIX compatibility was a requirement for NeXT to get a foot in the market targeted by Sun and Irix workstations.

Apple and NeXT never had a culture of pure CLI applications and daemons.

Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux

#72

Post by pjmlp »

khedoros1 wrote: post #57
pjmlp wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> x86_64 on a PC architecture for just about anything now, Not in any of my pockets or devices at home, besides the laptop.

In context of the discussion, we seem to be talking about personal computers, not hand-held devices, and my comment reflects that.

A tablet with a physical keyboard is a personal computer.

Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux

#73

Post by digi_owl »

gravypod wrote: post #13

I wish Apple would port their DE/WM to Linux and Free it with a license that says something along the lines of "you can install this if you paid for it". I'd easily pay 100$ for the Apple DE/WM suite sitting over my distro. I guess this is the closest you can get (aside from using Elementary OS).

Why bother? The Gnome boys are hard at work on that already...

Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux

#74

Post by alphapapa »

vonklaus wrote: post #7
0942v8653 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why it isn't working for you, but here's a snapshot of the page: http://archive.is/5Hrgu

Hmmm. It does load now. I was previously getting the "blog article you are looking for does not exist" screen. Thanks.

Strange, I loaded the page just now and got "Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist."

Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux

#75

Post by microtonal »

pawadu wrote: post #62
microtonal wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On MacOS, there's a bunch of quirks that make it harder to port. Environment variables are different enough to require duplication in scripts (DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH instead of LD_LIBRARY_PATH, unless we need DYLD_FALLBACK_LIBRARY_PATH.) I use CMake and it's a walk in the park. I just install the dependencies using Homebrew. CMake adds all the necessary include/library flags and builds the application bundle. It's even mu…

> Windows, in contrast, has been hell. Some of the dependencies of one particular project only compile with Visual Studio on Windows, not Cygwin/MingW. Seems like the issue is with the particular project you are trying to compile and you are blaming it on the OS. Also, Visual Studio has its own package manager with tons of libraries and tools.

I am not blaming Windows. It's just that Windows is a mismatch for projects that come from a UNIX tradition. I work in a field where most software is UNIX-first (ML/NLP), so Windows was virtually never a serious option as a development environment.

Of course, much of changes now with Windows Subsystem for Linux.

Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux

#77

Post by wruza »

pawadu wrote: post #58
pjmlp wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone wants UNIX clones and there are toons of goodies on the OS X stack for doing desktop development for people willing to pay for it.

> Not everyone wants UNIX clones Technically OS X is a "UNIX clone" > and there are toons of goodies on the OS X You mean there is a Clippy for OSX?

Recently I familiarized myself with Qt, that is often presented as core windows/linux framework. Half of linux apps is Qt. Years ago I also knew GTK+ 2.x very well. The other half is GTK. From developers perspective, Cocoa+AppKit/UIKit are orders of magnitude more powerful and conception-rich, and that is easily seen in UX, once you get base skills in it (i.e. stop believing 'it cannot do that', because 'it' mostly can).

Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux

#78

Post by tavert »

bluejekyll wrote: post #61
symlinkk wrote: post #16

It's really sad that the only way to get macOS running in a virtual machine is with hacks and tweaks. I'm working on a cross platform desktop app written in Qt and while it should theoretically work on macOS I haven't had a chance to actually try it, because I don't own any Apple computers. Apple is shooting themselves in the foot.

Depending on what your software does, Darwin might be a decent option to create a VM for tests. I assume this is what Travis-CI does for their "macOS" support.

Travis-CI's mac builders run on real Mac Mini hardware hosted on MacStadium.

Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux

#79

Post by vetinari »

kxyvr wrote: post #67
vetinari wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I usually avoid MinGW, because it links your binaries agains msvcrt.dll. It really shouldn't do it - https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20140411-00/?p=...

I haven't tried in awhile, but is the best option just to use VC directly at this point?

Probably yes, but on the other hand, VC is incapable of building some FOSS packages (xz comes to mind).

Re: Virtualize OS X on Linux

#80

Post by tavert »

kxyvr wrote: post #67
vetinari wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I usually avoid MinGW, because it links your binaries agains msvcrt.dll. It really shouldn't do it - https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20140411-00/?p=...

I haven't tried in awhile, but is the best option just to use VC directly at this point?

If everything is using cmake, and you don't need any inline assembly or fortran for scientific code, then maybe. But you end up in a parallel universe where everything that touches MSVC is just needlessly different than every other platform. If mingw gcc is working for you, then it's much easier for dev skills to transfer between building for Windows and building for unix. If you do need inline assembly and/or Fortran (LAPACK anyone?) then it's easiest to pretend visual studio doesn't exist.
Post reply on HN