Darwin 11.4 (e.g. Based on Mac OS X 10.7.4 )

[do...@dlogan.com]

Any plans to release a version of PureDarwin based on Darwin 11.4 (e.g. Mac OS X 10.7.4)?

If not, would anyone happen to have directions (Even if they're rough), on the steps required to do so, or to get the current PureDarwin image updated to 11.4?

I might be willing to pay a bounty if someone would put efforts into this, especially if there was a high likelihood I'd be able to run something like XCode Command Line tools on the system that was created.

[Daniel Bethe]

That particular update is way out of scope with the current reality, because of all the reasons listed on the web site.  See the Sitemap for the Blockers page and all that kind of thing.  We'd need binary roots -- in other words, we lack the source code to build even the current Darwin as a completely self-hosted, source-based OS -- so we need those binary files.  Darwin 9 needs binary roots in order to build at all, and we have those, but we don't have them for future Darwin versions.

There are any number of places to start with modernizing PureDarwin, but the general consensus has been to try to update the existing Darwin 9 in place, piecemeal, starting with GenericPlatform and XNU 10.  Even that is experimental.

Can you come to IRC and help?  Your enthusiasm is needed.  Thanks.

[Daniel Bethe]

I don't mean to say that in any discouraging way.  I'm just speaking in terms of immediate practicality or the path of least resistance.  It's still some resistance though, and what you're asking specifically would be a brick wall.  We're getting more organized and will revitalize our community relations with Apple, and continue to reimagine the whole project, so that the brick wall will eventually melt someday.  The revolution is only still beginning.  Come hang with us in #puredarwin on irc.freenode.net.

---

From: Daniel Bethe <d...@smuckola.org>
To: pured...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, 14 September 2012, 15:29
Subject: [PureDarwin] Re: Darwin 11.4 (e.g. Based on Mac OS X 10.7.4 )

[Ferdinand Klinzer]

Word! 

good point we can get more organized over #puredarwin! come hang out with us :)

cheers

[Ferdinand Klinzer]

Word! 

good point we can get more organized over #puredarwin! come hang out with us :)

cheers

Am 14.09.2012 um 23:35 schrieb Daniel Bethe:

[Ferdinand Klinzer]

test 123 

Am 14.09.2012 um 23:35 schrieb Daniel Bethe:

[Daniel Bethe]

I should apologize for the mentality of my response to Doug's inquiry.  I was intending to try to give some response, rather than having no response from a sparse and unknowing community; and I was trying to give a realistic frame to a completely blue sky question.  But upon further reflection, the problem is that there is no known realistic frame anymore.  What was once known, may have improved.

We have one person named InSaneDarwin on IRC, who has claimed to have built Darwin 10, in a matter of a few weeks.  Even while he was attempting it, this feat was thought to be impossible.  He was told that it was probably impossible and he said, "oh okay, I'll do that then."  It would seem that various other componentry has advanced independently of PureDarwin since 2009, possibly such as DarwinBuild.  Enough time has passed that perhaps the puredarwin.org documentation has suffered from conceptual decay, and needs to be completely retested.

As part of reimagining PureDarwin, we need to throw all assumptions out the window and start over.  Completely.

We need to give huge moral support to anyone who actually delivers a 'win', as InSaneDarwin and rafirafi have done.  They headbutted those limitations and they ingeniously plowed right through the scene.