Mac OS apps on Linux
binary...@hotmail.com
Can anyone tell me how to run off the shelf Mac OS X apps, eg. Pages,
or any of the iLife stuff, on Linux? Since Mac OS is a BSD, it should
be easy, methinks, but what's the exact software needed, and the exact
procedure? Since besides the kernel, the programs would also need
facilites on the part of X and whatever desktop system like Gnome or
KDE, it's not just a question of the kernel itself.
So - what's needed, is it possible, and how do I do it?
Thanks.
Peter Köhlmann
> Hello,
> Can anyone tell me how to run off the shelf Mac OS X apps, eg. Pages,
> or any of the iLife stuff, on Linux? Since Mac OS is a BSD,
No, it is not. It is a bastardized Mach-kernel with BSD-like userland apps.
They are *not* BSD, just patterned after them. The system config is
anything but similar to any other unix-like system
On top apple glued a non-standard GUI. In short, OSX is partly a unix-like
system, and for the most part a system totally different from anything else
Which makes porting apps to/from it mostly not worthwile
> it should
> be easy, methinks, but what's the exact software needed, and the exact
> procedure? Since besides the kernel, the programs would also need
> facilites on the part of X and whatever desktop system like Gnome or
> KDE, it's not just a question of the kernel itself.
> So - what's needed, is it possible, and how do I do it?
>
> Thanks.
Run Mac-on-Linux on a PPC machine
Otherwise, use the apps available for linux. About everything of the iLife
series can be had for linux, often in better quality. For example iTunes is
put to eternal shame by AmaroK. It simply is no contest at all
--
Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product.
Michael Koenig
> Can anyone tell me how to run off the shelf Mac OS X apps, eg. Pages,
> or any of the iLife stuff, on Linux?
You cannot run it directly. If you have a PPC machine there might be the
possibility of virtualization (Mac-on-Linux), on x86 there's just emulation
(eg. PearPC), and that will be *horribily* slow. In both cases you do need a
copy of Mac OS and, IIRC, you are not allowed to run it on anything but a Mac
legally.
> Since Mac OS is a BSD, it should be easy, methinks,
First of all, Mac OS is *not* just BSD, and running BSD software on Linux
requires some trickery as well.
> but what's the exact software needed, and the exact
> procedure? Since besides the kernel, the programs would also need
> facilites on the part of X and whatever desktop system like Gnome or
> KDE, it's not just a question of the kernel itself.
Differences between Mac OS and Linux:
- Mac OS runs on a PowerPC, while most Linux installations run on a x86. You
forgot to mention what you have.
- Mac OS uses Mach-O binaries, while Linux has ELF - so your kernel's loader
has no idea how to deal with binaries.
- The Mac OS "window manager" is Aqua, not X.
- Depending on the application your are missing several frameworks
(practically libraries), eg. Cocoa, Carbon, QuickTime, ...
> So - what's needed, is it possible, and how do I do it?
Buy a Mac...
--
M.I.K.e
Davoud
> On top apple glued a non-standard GUI...
Seems pretty much standard on my six Macs.
> Otherwise, use the apps available for linux. About everything of the iLife
> series can be had for linux, often in better quality. For example iTunes is
> put to eternal shame by AmaroK. It simply is no contest at all
So /that's/ why iTunes fell flat on its face and AmaroK is enormously
popular! It also explains why so many moviemakers are using Linux...
You missed the mark when replying to "binary-nomad:" Do what Linus
Torvald did: get a Mac. Because Linux apps /can/ be recompiled for BSD
Unix.
Davoud
--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com
Peter Köhlmann
> Peter Kˆ hlmann:
>> On top apple glued a non-standard GUI...
>
> Seems pretty much standard on my six Macs.
>
Standard from what vantage?
Viewed from here it is completely non-standard
In fact, viewed from every angle except from apple it is totally, utterly
non-standard. That is, from about 97% of the computing world
>> Otherwise, use the apps available for linux. About everything of the
>> iLife series can be had for linux, often in better quality. For example
>> iTunes is put to eternal shame by AmaroK. It simply is no contest at all
>
> So /that's/ why iTunes fell flat on its face and AmaroK is enormously
> popular!
Well, AmaroK isn't popular on Macs because they don't run a real OS
So they content themsewlves with half baked garbage
> It also explains why so many moviemakers are using Linux...
>
You mean the way LotR was made? With linux?
> You missed the mark when replying to "binary-nomad:" Do what Linus
> Torvald did: get a Mac. Because Linux apps /can/ be recompiled for BSD
> Unix.
>
Another Mac using idiot who thinks that Linus Torvald runs OSX on his
hardware. He expressly< stated that that machine will run linux, naturally.
Are really *that* *many* total retards in Mac-territory?
--
It's sweet to be remembered, but it's often cheaper to be forgotten.
Ed Heagle
Peter Kšhlmann <peter.k...@t-online.de> wrote:
> begin virus.txt.scr Davoud wrote:
>
> > Peter Kˆ hlmann:
> >> On top apple glued a non-standard GUI...
> >
> > Seems pretty much standard on my six Macs.
> >
>
> Standard from what vantage?
> Viewed from here it is completely non-standard
> In fact, viewed from every angle except from apple it is totally, utterly
> non-standard. That is, from about 97% of the computing world
>
True, it is non-standard compared to the rest of computing but other
developers like to "copy"/mimic parts from it anyway for use on their
interfaces.
> >> Otherwise, use the apps available for linux. About everything of the
> >> iLife series can be had for linux, often in better quality. For example
> >> iTunes is put to eternal shame by AmaroK. It simply is no contest at all
> >
> > So /that's/ why iTunes fell flat on its face and AmaroK is enormously
> > popular!
>
> Well, AmaroK isn't popular on Macs because they don't run a real OS
> So they content themsewlves with half baked garbage
>
> > It also explains why so many moviemakers are using Linux...
> >
>
> You mean the way LotR was made? With linux?
>
> > You missed the mark when replying to "binary-nomad:" Do what Linus
> > Torvald did: get a Mac. Because Linux apps /can/ be recompiled for BSD
> > Unix.
> >
>
> Another Mac using idiot who thinks that Linus Torvald runs OSX on his
> hardware. He expressly< stated that that machine will run linux, naturally.
>
> Are really *that* *many* total retards in Mac-territory?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Whoa there. No need to start that.
--
Ed Heagle
Bill Lloyd
<peter.k...@t-online.de> said:
> begin virus.txt.scr Davoud wrote:
>
>> Peter Kˆ hlmann:
>>> On top apple glued a non-standard GUI...
>>
>> Seems pretty much standard on my six Macs.
>>
>
> Standard from what vantage?
> Viewed from here it is completely non-standard
> In fact, viewed from every angle except from apple it is totally, utterly
> non-standard. That is, from about 97% of the computing world
So what is standard, then? Windows? Because that's the vast majority
of desktops.
Don't try and purport crap like KDE and Gnome are "standard" desktops.
Or maybe you're talking about CDE? Got news for you, buddy... there IS
no "standard" desktop.
>>> Otherwise, use the apps available for linux. About everything of the
>>> iLife series can be had for linux, often in better quality. For example
>>> iTunes is put to eternal shame by AmaroK. It simply is no contest at all
>>
>> So /that's/ why iTunes fell flat on its face and AmaroK is enormously
>> popular!
>
> Well, AmaroK isn't popular on Macs because they don't run a real OS
> So they content themsewlves with half baked garbage
Okay I'll bite then. What is a "real" OS, then?
>> It also explains why so many moviemakers are using Linux...
>
> You mean the way LotR was made? With linux?
Big fucking deal. It was rendered with Linux. Oh, don't forget that
many of the sequences were rendered with Shake -- an Apple product.
D'oh!
>> You missed the mark when replying to "binary-nomad:" Do what Linus
>> Torvald did: get a Mac. Because Linux apps /can/ be recompiled for BSD
>> Unix.
>>
>
> Another Mac using idiot who thinks that Linus Torvald runs OSX on his
> hardware. He expressly< stated that that machine will run linux, naturally.
Fair enough. But he must really like the hardware. Of course -- the
OP's point still stands -- nearly every Linux application can be built
and run on OS X. You can use darwinports or fink to get complete
builds of Gnome or KDE, if you actually want a crappy GUI. And then
you can run Koffice on a Mac.
I've done it, but find the experience still wanting -- I prefer Pages,
though Word works well enough, and is completely interoperable with the
Windows versions of the products, and passing MS Word and Excel
documents around is awfully standard in the business world, so it's not
bad to be able to run the real applications on... a Mac.
> Are really *that* *many* total retards in Mac-territory?
Don't believe so. Your panties sure seem to be in a bunch, though.
clvrmnky
[...]
> Another Mac using idiot who thinks that Linus Torvald runs OSX on his
> hardware. He expressly< stated that that machine will run linux, naturally.
>
> Are really *that* *many* total retards in Mac-territory?
If you can turn a vitriolic statement on it's head by simply changing
one word, then that statement is meaningless.
"Are really [sic] *that* *many* total retards in Linux-territory?"
This whole thread is stupid. Platform chauvinism is stupid. Getting
your panties in a twist because someone misunderstands the difference
between running binaries on different platforms and re-compiling for a
different platform is stupid.
OS X is as easy to target as any other Unix "like" (i.e., Linux)
platform. I've fucking done it myself, because this is part of what I
do for a living.
Jan Panteltje
<getn...@dslextreme.com> wrote in <11mciij...@corp.supernews.com>:
>Bwahahahahahaahah, you Linux dweebs are so clueless.
>
>Greg
AHHHHHHH OS WARS NICE DROOL DROOL YOU MUST BE A USER OF THOSE WHATSIT LITTLE PLAYERS THAT SCRATCH SO BAD YOU CANNOT SEE THE DISPLAY, ONLY IDIOTS WHO BUY anything steven jobs COMES UP WITH NOT TO MENTION THAT REDICULOUS FEETWARMER MINI WOULD NOT SEE THE GREATNESS AND GLORY OF L I N U X AND REGARDING YOUR OTHER EXCREMENT POST I HAVE BEEN USING ********* L I N U X ********* NOW FOR 13 YEARS OR SO AND YES IN MY DAYS IN UNI I USED THE APPLE TOO, NICE BUT SO LIMITED.... SOOOOO LIMITED NO OPEN HARDWARE... THEN NOT EVEN OPEN SOFTWARE. NOW FINALLY jobs HAS SEEN THAT HIS g5 WAS TOO SLOW TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY AND GOES FOR x86 YOU HAD BEEN CONNED. AND THAT itunesjoke, www.allofmp3.com IS NOT ONLY CHEAPER BUT HAS DECENT HIGH QUALITY MP3 FORMAT BUT OF COURSE YOU APPLES DO NOT HEAR THE DIFFERENCE BECAUSE OF LACK OF SENSE + DISCRIMNITATION ELSE YOU WOULD HAVE BOUGHT A NORMAL PC YEARS AGO.
just to pester you I removed all LF.
FEW MORE YEARS AND APPLE WILL BE MAKING INVISIBLE SMALL PCs.
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
Jan Panteltje
<getn...@dslextreme.com> wrote in <11mct11...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
>"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:4366...@news.usenetzone.com...
>> On a sunny day (Mon, 31 Oct 2005 08:46:06 -0800) it happened "G.T."
>> <getn...@dslextreme.com> wrote in <11mciij...@corp.supernews.com>:
>> >Bwahahahahahaahah, you Linux dweebs are so clueless.
>> >
>> >Greg
>> AND REGARDING YOUR OTHER EXCREMENT POST I HAVE BEEN
>> USING ********* L I N U X ********* NOW FOR 13 YEARS OR SO
>
>Sure, dude, and you're probably best buddies with Linus. You sound exactly
>like the type of guy who just discovered Linux and is so insecure that he
>just has to make everyone think he is some 1337 kernel hacker when in
>reality he is just an clueless fanboy.
MORE EXCREMENT FROM YOU WHY ARE YOU POSTING TO LINUX GROUP? BECAUSE ALREADY
YOU ARE KNOWN AS IDIOT IN EVERY OTHER GROUP.
NOW I SEND YOU BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM
AND YOU CAN ALWAYS GO TO HELL TOO.
LOOK AT THE HEADERS CLUELESS IDIOTIC USENET EXCREMENT.
tacit
binary...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Can anyone tell me how to run off the shelf Mac OS X apps, eg. Pages,
> or any of the iLife stuff, on Linux? Since Mac OS is a BSD, it should
> be easy, methinks...
You thinks wrong.
Mac OS X apps do not use KDE or Gnome. They use Apple's proprietary
environment, APIs, and libraries.
--
Art, photography, shareware, polyamory, literature, kink:
all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
Roger Leigh
> In article <1130751207.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> binary...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> Can anyone tell me how to run off the shelf Mac OS X apps, eg. Pages,
>> or any of the iLife stuff, on Linux? Since Mac OS is a BSD, it should
>> be easy, methinks...
>
> You thinks wrong.
>
> Mac OS X apps do not use KDE or Gnome. They use Apple's proprietary
> environment, APIs, and libraries.
I belive most of those interfaces are open, part of OpenStep IIRC. As
a result, you should be able to recompile with gobjc and link with the
GNUstep libraries on a Linux system. I'm not sure just how much of
the API is covered, but it certainly looks interesting.
Regards,
Roger
--
Roger Leigh
Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/
Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/
GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848. Please sign and encrypt your mail.
Leonard Blaisdell
> Are really *that* *many* total retards in Mac-territory?
Alas, we seem to have picked up another one.
leo
Tim Cutts
Roger Leigh <${rleigh}@invalid.whinlatter.ukfsn.org.invalid> wrote:
>I belive most of those interfaces are open, part of OpenStep IIRC. As
>a result, you should be able to recompile with gobjc and link with the
>GNUstep libraries on a Linux system. I'm not sure just how much of
>the API is covered, but it certainly looks interesting.
I think it's a fairly high proportion of the API that is common to both,
and indeed I have seen applications like GNU Mail which is a Mail
clone which can compile as a Cocoa application on OS X or can be
compiled on Linux using GNUSTEP.
But of course quite a fewf recent Apple Cocoa classes are not part of
OpenSTEP, so not everything would port, even if Apple were to release
the source code to their applications; they'd have to release the source
code to the frameworks as well. I think NSURL and its ilk are an
example, and obviously anything to do with the AddressBook and Safari
frameworks.
Hillegass has an appendix to his cocoa programming book which shows how
to build GNUSTEP applications, and does highlight some of the
differences.
Tim
Shawn Hirn
I don't think this is possible. Buy a Mac if you want to run Mac OS X
apps. You can buy a Mac mini for a modest amount of money.
Shawn Hirn
Roger Leigh <${rleigh}@invalid.whinlatter.ukfsn.org.invalid> wrote:
> tacit <tac...@aol.com> writes:
>
> > In article <1130751207.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> > binary...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> >> Can anyone tell me how to run off the shelf Mac OS X apps, eg. Pages,
> >> or any of the iLife stuff, on Linux? Since Mac OS is a BSD, it should
> >> be easy, methinks...
> >
> > You thinks wrong.
> >
> > Mac OS X apps do not use KDE or Gnome. They use Apple's proprietary
> > environment, APIs, and libraries.
>
> I belive most of those interfaces are open, part of OpenStep IIRC. As
> a result, you should be able to recompile with gobjc and link with the
> GNUstep libraries on a Linux system. I'm not sure just how much of
> the API is covered, but it certainly looks interesting.
You believe wrong.
Wes Groleau
> Can anyone tell me how to run off the shelf Mac OS X apps, eg. Pages,
> or any of the iLife stuff, on Linux? Since Mac OS is a BSD, it should
Not so easy. The stuff you mention is
not open source, so you can't recompile it.
And it does NOT use X-Windows, so if you had
the source, you'd have to convert it from Aqua
to X11
--
Wes Groleau
Even if you do learn to speak correct English,
whom are you going to speak it to?
-- Clarence Darrow
Wes Groleau
> OP's point still stands -- nearly every Linux application can be built
> and run on OS X. You can use darwinports or fink to get complete builds
The OP didn't really have a "point," he/she had a question.
And that question was not to run a Linux application
On OS X, it was how to run some non-X11, non-open source
Apple apps on Linux.
--
Wes Groleau
"Lewis's case for the existence of God is fallacious."
"You mean like circular reasoning?"
"He believes in God. Therefore, he's fallacious."
Wes Groleau
Roger Leigh wrote:
> tacit <tac...@aol.com> writes:
>
>>In article <1130751207.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>> binary...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>Can anyone tell me how to run off the shelf Mac OS X apps, eg. Pages,
>>>or any of the iLife stuff, on Linux? Since Mac OS is a BSD, it should
>>>be easy, methinks...
>>
>>You thinks wrong.
>>
>>Mac OS X apps do not use KDE or Gnome. They use Apple's proprietary
>>environment, APIs, and libraries.
>
> I belive most of those interfaces are open, part of OpenStep IIRC. As
> a result, you should be able to recompile with gobjc and link with the
> GNUstep libraries on a Linux system. I'm not sure just how much of
> the API is covered, but it certainly looks interesting.
You can't recompile unless you can get the source.
And you'd also have to get the source to Aqua,
'cause those things don't do X11.
--
Wes Groleau
Answer not a fool according to his folly,
lest thou also be like unto him.
Answer a fool according to his folly,
lest he be wise according to his own conceit.
-- Solomon
Are you saying there's no good way to answer a fool?
-- Groleau
Christopher Browne
>
>> In article <1130751207.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>> binary...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Can anyone tell me how to run off the shelf Mac OS X apps, eg. Pages,
>>> or any of the iLife stuff, on Linux? Since Mac OS is a BSD, it should
>>> be easy, methinks...
>>
>> You thinks wrong.
>>
>> Mac OS X apps do not use KDE or Gnome. They use Apple's proprietary
>> environment, APIs, and libraries.
>
> I belive most of those interfaces are open, part of OpenStep IIRC. As
> a result, you should be able to recompile with gobjc and link with the
> GNUstep libraries on a Linux system. I'm not sure just how much of
> the API is covered, but it certainly looks interesting.
You believe wrong.
Some of Apple's interfaces may have been *based* on OpenStep, but that
doesn't mean that applications can be recompiled to run with GNUstep.
Furthermore, that would only "work," as much as it could be said to
"work," for applications written in Objective C that are available in
source code form.
It won't be much help for the average binary-only Mac OS-X application
that may depend on additional services not included in GNUstep.
It would doubtless be cheaper and less trouble to buy a computer from
Apple.
--
(reverse (concatenate 'string "moc.liamg" "@" "enworbbc"))
http://cbbrowne.com/info/
If we were meant to fly, we wouldn't keep losing our luggage.
James McIninch
application 'PearPC'. Your mileage will vary on how well it works.
It should be noted that MacOS is not plain BSD, but more specifically a BSD
"personality" running on top of the Mach microkernel. The difference is
that the BSD system calls call into the microkernel as opposed ot dealing
directly with hardware itself. From an application programmer's
perspective, it's BSD, but from a systems programmer/driver developer's
perspective it can be quite different.
binary...@hotmail.com wrote:
--
Remove '.nospam' from e-mail address to reply by e-mail
binary...@hotmail.com
output some kind of disassembly information from the EXE file, which I
could burn to a new CD, and then use to run on Linux somehow? Assuming
a Strip'd exe, which is what I'm assuming an off-the-shelf CD would be
;), all we'd get is PPC assembly itself - are there machine converters,
to make x86 asm source out of this, which could be assembled? I assume
this is what emulators like VMware etc. do, so it should be....
But far more interesting (if it's possible) would be to make GDB spit
out some kind of intermediate Object format, which we could then try
and do whatever with (something like the Java bytecode, if you
understand what I'm saying).
Just posted a topic on this to comp.compilers after reading this... :)
Dragonmaster Lou
>
>
> Roger Leigh wrote:
>> tacit <tac...@aol.com> writes:
>>
>>>In article <1130751207.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>>> binary...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>Can anyone tell me how to run off the shelf Mac OS X apps, eg. Pages,
>>>>or any of the iLife stuff, on Linux? Since Mac OS is a BSD, it should
>>>>be easy, methinks...
>>>
>>>You thinks wrong.
>>>
>>>Mac OS X apps do not use KDE or Gnome. They use Apple's proprietary
>>>environment, APIs, and libraries.
>>
>> I belive most of those interfaces are open, part of OpenStep IIRC. As
>> a result, you should be able to recompile with gobjc and link with the
>> GNUstep libraries on a Linux system. I'm not sure just how much of
>> the API is covered, but it certainly looks interesting.
>
> You can't recompile unless you can get the source.
> And you'd also have to get the source to Aqua,
> 'cause those things don't do X11.
Actually, it would run on X11 with GNUstep. The Cocoa/GNUStep APIs are
window system agnostic.
--
-------------------- http://www.techhouse.org/lou ----------------------
"Dragonmaster Lou" | "Searching for a distant star, heading off to
lou at tealstudios com| Iscandar, leaving all we love behind, who knows
Tech House Alum | what dangers we'll find..."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dragonmaster Lou
> On 2005-11-02, Wes Groleau <grolea...@freeshell.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Roger Leigh wrote:
>>> tacit <tac...@aol.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>In article <1130751207.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>>>> binary...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Can anyone tell me how to run off the shelf Mac OS X apps, eg. Pages,
>>>>>or any of the iLife stuff, on Linux? Since Mac OS is a BSD, it should
>>>>>be easy, methinks...
>>>>
>>>>You thinks wrong.
>>>>
>>>>Mac OS X apps do not use KDE or Gnome. They use Apple's proprietary
>>>>environment, APIs, and libraries.
>>>
>>> I belive most of those interfaces are open, part of OpenStep IIRC. As
>>> a result, you should be able to recompile with gobjc and link with the
>>> GNUstep libraries on a Linux system. I'm not sure just how much of
>>> the API is covered, but it certainly looks interesting.
>>
>> You can't recompile unless you can get the source.
>> And you'd also have to get the source to Aqua,
>> 'cause those things don't do X11.
>
> Actually, it would run on X11 with GNUstep. The Cocoa/GNUStep APIs are
> window system agnostic.
To be clear, you still would need the source to the application (though
not Aqua). Also, the application would have to only use APIs that are
common in GNUStep and Cocoa (which is probably most of them, but not all
of them).
Jochem Huhmann
> To be clear, you still would need the source to the application (though
> not Aqua). Also, the application would have to only use APIs that are
> common in GNUStep and Cocoa (which is probably most of them, but not all
> of them).
The devil is in the detail as they say, and there are many details... In
practice the odds that a random halfway complex real app developed
against Cocoa compiles with GNUStep are not that good at all. GNUStep
implements not everything of OPENSTEP on one hand and on the other Cocoa
is not purely OPENSTEP. And there are very few Mac apps that use Cocao
and nothing else. If you target both of GNUStep and Cocoa when you
develop an app you can make it work, but who does that? Almost noone.
There are exceptions like GNUMail.app, but these are exceptions.
If you want to have an environment as close as possible to OS X
(actually to NEXTSTEP) on Linux, install GNUstep. Compare
http://www.collaboration-world.com/gnumail.data/screenshots/v1.2.0pre1/gnumail-gs.png and
http://www.collaboration-world.com/gnumail.data/screenshots/v1.2.0pre1/gnumail-osx.png
to see how an app compiled from the same sources can look on Linux and
OS X, but don't expect to find many of these.
Jochem
--
"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no
longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Wes Groleau
> Is there any way to get GDB (or whatever's equivalent on the Mac OS) to
> output some kind of disassembly information from the EXE file, which I
> could burn to a new CD, and then use to run on Linux somehow? Assuming
> a Strip'd exe, which is what I'm assuming an off-the-shelf CD would be
> ;), all we'd get is PPC assembly itself - are there machine converters,
> to make x86 asm source out of this, which could be assembled? I assume
You're almost there! All you have to do now is write
a Linux emulator for Darwin, Mac OS, Finder, and Aqua.
Or you could drop Linux and install the Intel version
of Darwin, and write just the other three.
Or you could buy an Apple developer's license and get
a legal copy of Mac OS for intel,.....
The emulator for the Mac BIOS is already available,
though I don't know where to find it. If you find it,
you should know it violates Apple's copyright.
--
Wes Groleau
After the christening of his baby brother in church, Jason sobbed
all the way home in the back seat of the car. His father asked him
three times what was wrong. Finally, the boy replied, "That preacher
said he wanted us brought up in a Christian home, and I wanted to
stay with you guys."
binary...@hotmail.com
Michael Vilain wrote:
>
> Given a sufficient amount of crack and a large enough population of
> howler monkey's, I think it's possible.
The neighbourhood darkens with narcotic, and primate activity:
http://pearpc.sourceforge.net/about.html (CPU JITC-X86)
binary...@hotmail.com
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/power/library/pa-emulation.html?ca=dgr-lnxw41EmulatePPC
(QEMU)
Aawara Chowdhury
Nice bit of misdirection there. PearPC has nothing to do with your
post that Mr. Vilain responded to. Here's what you posted:
And, as was pointed out to you, given a sufficient amount of crack and
a troop of monkeys, your suggestion may be possible.
AC
--
Aawara Chowdhury, Shelter 5300, NOLA.
binary...@hotmail.com
Aawara Chowdhury wrote:
> Nice bit of misdirection there. PearPC has nothing to do with your
> post that Mr. Vilain responded to. Here's what you posted:
I don't follow....? PearPC looks close to what I had in mind....... ?
(not exactly what I posted, but close - the other webpage is even
better, QEMU looks like it implements word-for-word what I said).
Can you explain yourself?
Aawara Chowdhury
You're an idiot. Neither PearPC nor QEMU do anything remotely like
what you suggest.
G.T.
<binary...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131095461.7...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Because you said this:
"Is there any way to get GDB (or whatever's equivalent on the Mac OS) to
output some kind of disassembly information from the EXE file, which I
could burn to a new CD, and then use to run on Linux somehow? Assuming
a Strip'd exe, which is what I'm assuming an off-the-shelf CD would be
;), all we'd get is PPC assembly itself - are there machine converters,
to make x86 asm source out of this, which could be assembled? I assume
this is what emulators like VMware etc. do, so it should be...."
This is nothing like what VMware or PearPC or any other machine emulators
do.
Greg
S7Solutions
You need to port Mac apps onto Linux. There are times when theporting
is very simple and there are times when the porting is a big chore by
itself. Depends on many issues like how much GUI based, how much system
level kernel issues are used etc. S7 [S7Solutions.com] has a tool
called Linux-it which helps to summarize the port effort and also port
the same.
Regards
Manju
*** CUSTOMER comes FIRST, come what may ********
Manjunath M
S7 Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
#83 Railway Parallel Road, Kumara Park West
Bangalore - 560020, India
Telephone: +91-80-51526777
Fax: +91-80-2334135
2936 173rd CT NE
Redmond, WA 98052, USA
Telephone: (425) 867 1457
Fax: (425) 883 2597
Toll Free: 1-888-224-6174
Yahoo messenger ID: s7softwaresolutions
MSN messenger ID: manj...@hotmail.com
Skype ID: s7softwaresolutions
"Redefining cross-platform porting & migration"
************************************************
beavis
S7Solutions <manju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> S7 Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
You *really* need to trim that signature down. 26 lines in more than
excessive.