Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Programming Businesses Apple IT Technology

Mac OS X Dec 2002 Developer Tools 42

Posted by pudge from the merry-christmas dept.
SkeeterMac writes "Apple today released the December 2002 developer tools, available for download for ADC Members. Among the list of updates is Project Builder 2.1 with 'better CVS support' -- maybe this one will let me specify the CVSROOT!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mac OS X Dec 2002 Developer Tools More

Mac OS X Dec 2002 Developer Tools

Comments Filter:

  • Lemme tell ya... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by TRoLLaXoR ( 181585 )

    That GNU-Darwin people decides not to link to "proprietary" libraries is, of course, a result of them using the GNU Public License so extensively-- and now the primary supported Darwin platform is not even supported in this project!

    This makes me shake my head and think "what the fuck." This project is not only shooting itself in the foot by choosing a platform not fully supported by the OS, but is also screwing over the real meat of Darwin's userbase: PowerPC owners. This move is akin to opening a car garage (in America) whose mechanics are all experienced in servicing American cars, and then changing policy months later, stating that the garage will only work on foreign models.

    Where's the fucking logic?

    Seriously, am I the only one who is wondering who the Hell is in charge at that project? Kool-Aid Man? This move makes so little sense I can't tell if the people at GNU-Darwin are really that stupid, or if I am waking up in alternate realities every damn morning. I almost kind of hope for the latter.

    This is the GPL in action, Mac faithful. Get down and kiss Apple's butt for choosing the BSD license.

    • Re:Lemme tell ya... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by andrewski ( 113600 ) on Saturday December 21, 2002 @07:34PM (#4937901) Homepage
      I think that the GNU-Darwin folk think that they should be on equal footing with Apple - deciding together what direction the system should go. In reality, however, one realizes that Darwin is Apple's system. They decide what happens to the OS, what direction it takes, &c.

      Maybe they expect their move to 'force' Apple to open source everything, so they can port it to X86. Gee, that'd be a great business move. Just make all their hardware redundant - after all, if they did that, anybody could install OS X on their generic PC.

      In the meantime, I would hope that the Gnu-Darwin people learn about GNUstep - a GPL'd implementation of Openstep which could enable many OS X applications (not all mind you) to run on most any OS with a simple recompile.

      I must agree with you that this move make no sense at all. Why would anybody have any reason to run an orphaned OS, stripped of most of the things that distinguish it from any other Free *nix, and exclusively on a different platform than most of the installed Darwin systems run?!? Seriously, you GNU-Darwin folk should find a new crack dealer. I think your shit is contaminated with the stupids.

    • Re:Lemme tell ya... (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      This is the GPL in action, Mac faithful. Get down and kiss Apple's butt for choosing the BSD license.

      Please don't try to start a fucking GPL vs BSD flamewar. They both have their uses.

      • Re:Lemme tell ya... (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Yes. The use of the BSD license is to get reference-quality software out there to improve society as a whole. The BSD license has given us things like OS X.

        The use of the GPL is to give RMS a hard-on. The GPL has given us things like Linux.
    • "Where's the fucking logic?"

      It's free and open.
      Please name a viable alternative that is as useful and free.
    • That GNU-Darwin people decides not to link to "proprietary" libraries is, of course, a result of them using the GNU Public License so extensively-- and now the primary supported Darwin platform is not even supported in this project!

      Your interpretation is wrong. The GPL allows linking to proprietary system libraries. Otherwise, it would be impossible to use GNU tools on proprietary UNIX systems.

      The reason why the GNU-Darwin folks have stopped supporting Apple's platforms is because they are really pissed off at some of Apple's policies and actions, and frankly, I can't blame them.

      Where's the fucking logic?

      The "fucking logic" is that Darwin is a derivative of an open source kernel; Apple took Mach and built a business around it. The fact that other people bring the formerly open source kernel back into the public arena and build a system around it implies no obligation to blindly accept everything else Apple is doing. In fact, Apple itself has made clear that they want open source not to tread anywhere near creating a work-alike of their system: Cocoa and other parts of Macintosh OS X are highly proprietary and considered the "crown jewels" by Apple.

      This is the GPL in action, Mac faithful. Get down and kiss Apple's butt for choosing the BSD license.

      This has nothing to do with the GPL.

      And, in any case, where did Apple "choose" the BSD license? NeXT took some software under the BSD license and built a large proprietary system around it. Apple also took some GPL'ed software (gcc) and used it. And the open source software Apple is releasing is usually covered by non-BSD licenses. I don't see much of a difference between the two now that the software has been released.

      But if Mach had been covered by the GPL, NeXT's changes to it would have become public a long time ago, which means that we might all be running Darwin now instead of Linux. If you like Apple, I think that's something you should have liked.

      Apple still has a mostly-proprietary world view, and they seem to use open source only if they think it gives them a short-term business advantage. I think that's going to hurt them in the long term. Something like Cocoa/Quartz, for example, only even stands a chance to become widely used if it gets open sourced and ported to other systems.

      • If Mach had been covered by GPL, NeXT wouldn't have used it.

        Its really quite simple

        You're probably forgetting that the guy who wrote Mach was also the lead software engineer guy (or something) at NeXT and is now the software guru at Apple too
        • If Mach had been covered by GPL, NeXT wouldn't have used it.

          NeXT used GNU C, and Objective-C was much more of a competitive feature of NeXT than a bunch of modifications to a kernel that was open source anyway.

          And it's not like NeXT really had much choice anyway: there weren't a lot of other kernels they could have used around back then.

        • IIRC, Steve said as early as the first Byte (I think) article about the Cube in 1988 that if the Mach kernel didn't work out well, they would willingly switch to another. The kernel wasn't the key to the system, it was just a means to an end.
    • Way to cut-and-paste this from MacSlash to here, in an extremely offtopic section here, even.

  • Harrumph (Score:5, Informative)

    by daeley ( 126313 ) on Saturday December 21, 2002 @03:06PM (#4936915) Homepage
    There's a lot more to this update than just that:
    • Project Builder 2.1
    • gcc 3.1
    • AppleScript Studio 1.2.1
    • CHUD 2.5.1
    • AppleScript Editor 2.0 Beta
    • jikes 1.17
    • PackageMaker
    • Sherlock SDK
    • DiscRecording SDK
    • CoreAudio SDK
    • FireWire SDK
    • ForceFeedback SDK
    • AvailabilityMacros
    • New documentation

    Those interested in Java 1.4.x development should also head over there to download the Java 1.4.1 Developer Preview 8 (pre-release implementation of JDK 1.4.1 that runs on Mac OS X 10.2 or later).

    • Wasn't GCC 3.1 included with the Jaguar Dev Tools already? If so, does this mean the new package will install GCC 3.1 on 10.1.x machines as well?

      • Re:Harrumph (Score:3, Informative)

        by danamania ( 540950 )
        The December 2002 dev tools are only for 10.2.x, so - looks like no new GCC - Apple's advice for 10.1.x is to use the April 2002 dev tools

  • CVS (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Hanji ( 626246 ) on Saturday December 21, 2002 @03:34PM (#4937020)
    maybe this one will let me specify the CVSROOT!
    Really - Project Builder's CVS integration is laughable - it won't even work with my pserver(it refuses to recognize that I am logged in).
    I really hope this new version also improves the class browser, which drives me insane, because I can't use it to look up methods of a class I'm working with, because it insists on jumping to the source file when I click on a class.

    • Re:CVS (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Control-click a class in the list. When the popup menu comes up, dismiss it. You should now have a list of the class's methods, and your own source file will still be in the main editor window.

  • AppleScript updates are the coolest (Score:5, Informative)

    by thefinite ( 563510 ) on Saturday December 21, 2002 @07:02PM (#4937805)
    The new changes in AppleScript, while still not in final versions, are by far the coolest. You can now manipulate menu items and other GUI items with AppleScript, something that opens up a lot more and used to be in the realm of Quickkeys. Also, the Script Editor is much better, but still not as cool as some of the freeware/shareware editors you can find. Still, the future of AppleScript, once very questionable under OS X, is now brighter than it has ever been!

  • Parallel building... (Score:4, Informative)

    by dr00g911 ( 531736 ) on Sunday December 22, 2002 @01:19AM (#4939225)
    Word has it that the Dec 2002 Dev package includes support for parallel builds... meaning that you can utilize mutliple processors during build time.

    I personally haven't verified this as I don't have a wind tunnel to test on, but word on the street is that it shows pretty huge gains during compiles.
  • I'm pulong the 300MB file in via my DSL (capped at 300KB/sec) at a lousy 4KB/sec :-(


    Is anyone else experiencing this, or is my conn balooney ?

  • Yay! It fixes the static local bug! (Score:3, Informative)

    by JMZorko ( 150414 ) on Sunday December 22, 2002 @01:32PM (#4940766) Homepage
    The version of gcc3.1 that came with 10.2 had an irritating bug which resulted in code with local static variables in templated classes to not link. I don't know if the problem was with the C++ compiler or ld, but this version fixes that (just tried it), yippee!

    It _is_ nice to see Apple listening to us :-)

    Regards,

    John

  • ... autocomplete. Minor improvements are nice, but something that would save me huge amounts of time running laps around the devdocs would really make my day.
  • When you finish installing reboot. When the finder loads hold down CMD, SHIFT, OPTION and CONTROL and select About this Mac from the Finder menu to reveal a cool easter egg. Here's a pic [celsius1414.com]

Slashdot Top Deals

"Here's something to think about: How come you never see a headline like `Psychic Wins Lottery.'" -- Comedian Jay Leno

Close