Live data from Hacker News

Darling – MacOS translation layer for Linux

darlinghq.org

111–120 of 274 posts

Re: Darling – MacOS translation layer for Linux

#111
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it lacks well designed high quality GUI applications. If porting to Linux was done easier that could change. Fundamental to most peoples complaints about desktop Linux applications is the lack of look and feel cohesion across all permutations of distro, desktop, and toolkit. Wine applications using the Windows APIs look like complete garbage and fit in nowhere. The same would be true of OSX Cocoa apps - they wouldn…

I suppose it's useful when almost everything works, but that one thing that you absolutely need isn't otherwise available.

This is my problem. Audio editing on Linux is a joke. For everything else I do, Linux can get me there. So I need a Mac or a PC as an audio editor? Might as well just get a Mac or a PC. I'll have to maintain it anyway, and it can do everything Linux can do, plus probably be better supported.

Re: Darling – MacOS translation layer for Linux

#112
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wrote a blog post once about how the web is the new presentation layer for the desktop, that this is not necessarily a bad thing, and that a desktop OS (e.g. a Linux distro) should just fully embrace it by implementing a desktop that runs 100% via web technologies. Local and remote web apps could coexist as first class citizens, etc. I basically argued that HTML+JS+CSS renderers are the new X and that HTTP(S) is th…

While I agree with your view of HTML+CSS+JS in relation to X and would even go as far as to say the shift towards "webified" apps is (mostly) a good thing, it still saddens me as a developer to see it happening. It's an ecosystem that doesn't discourage lazy practices and it makes me feel unimportant because modern computers can more or less keep up with even the most poorly-written webified apps. I think it's that s…

IMHO the problem is that you actually do need a decent chunk of all that stuff. Not all, but a good chunk.

A UI engine is a problem on par with creating a good game engine like Unity. If you don't have a loooooooong list of capabilities and polish your UI is a toy. By the time you extend and build it out enough to make it not a toy you will have re-implemented either Aqua/Cocoa, Microsoft's UI, or the web but yours will be new and nobody will know how to code for it.

Now make it flexible and programmable and extensible enough to be future-proof and battle hardened. Now make it work remotely over the wire with good performance. Now make it fast and efficient. Now make it secure.

The web isn't perfect by any stretch but it's IMHO the best combination of:

- Complete

- Modern

- Battle tested, including security

- Maintained by professionals

- Can be made to look good

- Has a yuuuuge developer community that isn't going anywhere

Qt is the closest other contender but its dev community is less than 1% of the web's. It's also starting to... ahem... look more and more like a web stack. It's still a little lighter and faster than the web but not much, and IMHO that gap is narrowing and will narrow even more. Look into Mozilla Quantum for an example of what's coming. We're going to have aggressively multithreaded GPU-assisted HTML+CSS renderers and web assembly soon.

JS is not my favorite language but it's not bad either for what it is (IMHO) and ES6+ features make it a lot better. It's a very acceptable "BASIC for the 21st century" and is perfectly fine for driving a presentation layer, schlepping data around, and controlling stuff. JS VMs are impressively fast given the difficulty of accelerating the language, and they are not overly heavy. WASM is going to break down this barrier as well by allowing CLANG to target the web as a native platform.

Web renderers are heavy but an OS that embraces the web as its presentation layer across the board could load one instance of all that bloat instead of one instance per app.

(A web browser on this imaginary platform would be a thin wrapper around an iframe.)

You'd have to pay a lot of attention to security. You might have to fork or implement a few added things into a good web engine to make it ready for such a use case, like better security models and resource management models around iframes. But that pales in comparison to the work it would take to re-invent a stack from scratch and reach this level of capability and then to build an entire ecosystem of this size and breadth around that stack. Forget about that unless you have a billion dollars to burn.

Re: Darling – MacOS translation layer for Linux

#113
post #18
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think such a thing exists, probably because there are few/no applications that target Linux and not OS X that aren't also open source. Can you give an example of an app that is only released as a compiled binary for Linux and not OS X?

FPGA development tools from xilinx or altera are one example.

Pretty much all HDL tools. I've heard on the grapevine that Apple's own internal chip teams have to use Linux or Windows because the HDL vendors won't port to OSX, even with Apple willing to fund the effort.

Re: Darling – MacOS translation layer for Linux

#114
post #49

I am hoping that with cross platform Swift we can start seeing more libraries to help us port Mac apps to Linux. I am a Mac developer but I'd love to make stuff available on Linux. I really like Linux as a backup plan, in case Apple totally drops the ball on professionals on the Mac. The Linux desktop is getting pretty good, but it lacks well designed high quality GUI applications. If porting to Linux was done easier…

> it lacks well designed high quality GUI applications. If porting to Linux was done easier that could change. Fundamental to most peoples complaints about desktop Linux applications is the lack of look and feel cohesion across all permutations of distro, desktop, and toolkit. Wine applications using the Windows APIs look like complete garbage and fit in nowhere. The same would be true of OSX Cocoa apps - they wouldn…

I think a better way to handle this is to show people how to use the command line. That does have a cohesive look and feel and is generally very well behaved compared to nearly anything else.

Unfortunately that seems to scare people away so everyone hacks GUIs together to keep them from running and that's how we got to where we are now.

Re: Darling – MacOS translation layer for Linux

#115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, that is impressive battery life. I am curious, what Linux distributions you used? (especially for those back in the 90s :D) I was stuck on Gentoo than Arch for the most of the time.

Probably just MakingStuffUp.iso

I get about 10 to 12 on my x240 with Debian if I turn down the screen brightness. Especially if I am mostly in vim.

Re: Darling – MacOS translation layer for Linux

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OS X is posix-compliant. It doesn't implement certain GNUisms but depending on any vendor-specific problems is going to be a pain point.

Darwin is very much not POSIX-compliant. It may aim to be, but there are so many blatant unfixed bugs (broken poll, broken cmsg, etc.) and missing features (ptrace, etc.) that porting work is frequently necessary.

Yes, it is POSIX compliant. Its also an official UNIX.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5785516/is-osx-a-posix-os

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification

Presence of bugs does not preclude you from being compliant to the spec.

...also... Linux is not officially compliant to either one.

Re: Darling – MacOS translation layer for Linux

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose it's useful when almost everything works, but that one thing that you absolutely need isn't otherwise available.

This is my problem. Audio editing on Linux is a joke. For everything else I do, Linux can get me there. So I need a Mac or a PC as an audio editor? Might as well just get a Mac or a PC. I'll have to maintain it anyway, and it can do everything Linux can do, plus probably be better supported.

Would like to point out, unless you are running on non-x86 hardware or a tablet, the term pc still applies to linux based hardware.

Re: Darling – MacOS translation layer for Linux

#120
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I go back and forth on whether this would truly be useful. 10-15 years ago, having a fully baked, first class, slavishly source compatible implementation of GNUstep with broad adoption throughout Linux land would have likely been a game changer. But now, it seems webified apps are king. The handful of native apps that people use are already satisfactorily implementable on Linux. In fact, a great number of native apps…

I wrote a blog post once about how the web is the new presentation layer for the desktop, that this is not necessarily a bad thing, and that a desktop OS (e.g. a Linux distro) should just fully embrace it by implementing a desktop that runs 100% via web technologies. Local and remote web apps could coexist as first class citizens, etc. I basically argued that HTML+JS+CSS renderers are the new X and that HTTP(S) is th…

Could you post your blog article? I've though a similar thing for years and have never been able to communicate it.
Post reply on HN