[oblio]

And those core utils are generally seen as a hindrance by developers using it.

Plus how long did MacOS diverge from FreeBSD? 20+ years ago? Does it even resemble current FreeBSD enough that this observation makes sense, except from a software history perspective?

Edit: Actually, considering that the divergence started with NextStep in 1988, from 4.3 BSD and not FreeBSD, and that Unix was created in 1969, this becomes a bit like comparing Unix 1969 to Linux 1999... so not really relevant anymore.

[ayushnix]

> Plus how long did MacOS diverge from FreeBSD? 20+ years ago? Does it even resemble current FreeBSD enough that this observation makes sense, except from a software history perspective?

You'll always find people who'll say that Android and ChromeOS are Linux distributions and MacOS is based on FreeBSD. I guess it makes them feel good.

[nix23]

>Android and ChromeOS are Linux distributions

They are, but they are not GNU/Linux...Alpine is not Gnu/Linux too, but BusyBox/musl/Linux, maybe it makes others sad that you don't know the difference.

>MacOS is based on FreeBSD. I guess it makes them feel good

For years exactly that was written on Apples own macOSX page, but you know it better right?

https://web.archive.org/web/20090207062005/https://www.apple...

>>Mac OS X Server is based largely on the FreeBSD distribution and includes the latest advances from this development community.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090205151917/http://images.app...

>> Kernel based on FreeBSD and Mach 3.0

https://web.archive.org/web/20081230112742/http://images.app...

>>The Mac OS X kernel at the heart of Darwin is based on FreeBSD 5 and Mach 3.0

Have Fun :)

[ayushnix]

> Alpine is not Gnu/Linux too, but BusyBox/musl/Linux, maybe it makes others sad that you don't know the difference.

I'm more concerned with the practical significance of calling Android or ChromeOS a Linux distribution than being pedantic for the history books.

Sure, Alpine doesn't use the usual userland you'll find on most Linux distributions but it isn't an alien experience and you can use it mostly like any other Linux distribution out there. You'll still find a POSIX shell and a package manager to install packages. There's Xorg or Wayland for the GUI and you'll find familiar desktop environments and window managers.

Unlike Android, you won't find absence of root access on Alpine. There's no restriction on placement of data on directories like /usr and /var. You won't find dozens of UIDs for different processes running at the same time on a single user system. You can't just slap Android on any hardware x86_64 hardware you want and expect it to work fine. Hell, you can't even do that on ARM devices if you're not using out-of-tree patches and firmware blobs. The bluetooth and audio stack on Android is completely different than what you'll use on any Linux distribution.

So yeah, if we're being pedantic, sure, Android is a Linux distribution because it uses the Linux kernel. Good luck using it like a typical Linux distribution though.

> For years exactly that was written on Apples own macOSX page, but you know it better right?

What I wrote above. Sure, pages written decades ago indicate that the Apple used FreeBSD as its base for its kernel but I doubt their kernel is anything close to upstream FreeBSD at this point. The same goes for their userland and graphics stack. Would you call OrbisOS, used by PS4, a distribution of FreeBSD? Can you do anything meaningful with it like you can with FreeBSD?

[nix23]

>>Would you call OrbisOS, used by PS4, a distribution of FreeBSD?

No one said that, and no one said MacOS is a FreeBSD distribution, you where wrong an now you try too put your half-knowledge into other mouths.

You can stop now.

[ayushnix]

> >>Would you call OrbisOS, used by PS4, a distribution of FreeBSD?

> you where wrong an now you try too put your half-knowledge into other mouths.

> You can stop now.

Nice job being condescending and rude.

[nix23]

Congratulation for still not understanding what a distribution is.

[Dylan16807]

> You'll always find people who'll say that Android and ChromeOS are Linux distributions and MacOS is based on FreeBSD. I guess it makes them feel good.

A "linux distribution" just requires the kernel, and the version they use isn't that modified.

If you want a wrong statement, it would have to be more like saying they're the same distribution as the internal builds used by Android Inc. in 2005.

[nix23]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacOS#Mac_OS_X_10.5_Leopard

>>It was also the first BSD-based OS to receive UNIX 03 certification

[edgyquant]

Yes Mac is a BSD but isn’t FreeBSD as it was forked two decades ago and has a completely different architecture. You wouldn’t say Dragonfly is FreeBSD, why would MacOS be?

[nix23]

>Yes Mac is a BSD but isn’t FreeBSD

No one said that ever....

[nix23]

>And those core utils are generally seen as a hindrance by developers using it.

I don't like Mac nor do i like gnu-coreutil...but that's my personal taste, and not my problem.

>Plus how long did MacOS diverge from FreeBSD? 20+ years ago? Does it even resemble current FreeBSD enough that this observation makes sense, except from a software history perspective?

I said what kernel it uses (FreeBSD and Mach) and i don't know if Apple re-bases their code on current FreeBSD-Code...you can look that for for yourself. Don't start twisting facts because you didn't knew better, at least now you know.

[oblio]

> I don't like Mac nor do i like gnu-coreutil...but that's my personal taste, and not my problem.

Well, it's not your problem, but when millions of developers like GNU coreutils over BSD coreutils, then it kind of becomes everyone's problem :-)

There's a reason GNU became popular when there were other tools available before it appeared.

[nix23]

>but when millions of developers like GNU coreutils over BSD coreutils

I don't care if they cannot install Gnu/Linux on their machine, but being forced to use a proprietary system like Mac. Not my problem. Don't want bsd-core-utils? Don't buy apple, it's so easy.

>There's a reason GNU became popular when there were other tools available before it appeared.

That's not the reason and you know it, stop with that half-knowledge you think you have.

Something to read for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_Laboratories,_Inc.....

[oblio]

> Don't buy apple, it's so easy.

And yet they do, by the millions :-) Anyway, I don't really have a bone to pick on this topic.

However:

> That's not the reason and you know it, stop with that half-knowledge you think you have.

Yes, it is. They were full of features and that's why they became popular.

Please enlighten us with your rest-of-half-knowledge, otherwise.