Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Databases Oracle Apple

Apple Removes MySQL From Lion Server 303

sfcrazy also noticed that Apple has officially removed MySQL from Lion Server, opting instead to include PostgreSQL, albeit in command line only form. The article speculates that the change is because MySQL is now Oracle property, and Apple is concerned about IP issues following all the legal issues surrounding Java.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Removes MySQL From Lion Server

Comments Filter:
  • by Atzanteol ( 99067 ) on Wednesday August 03, 2011 @09:11AM (#36971328) Homepage
    "Use and admin" != "install."
  • by amorsen ( 7485 ) <> on Wednesday August 03, 2011 @09:12AM (#36971362)

    I keep hearing that Postgres is hard to admin. Yet Postgres integrates with the normal Unix user accounts so I don't have to worry about users and passwords, it uses sockets by default so I don't have to worry about networking (unless the SQL server is remote), it provides sane semantics without having to worry about table types...

    I like SHOW CREATE TABLE from MySQL and the \-commands could use some aliases, but other than that Postgres is rather nice to admin and use.

  • by pieterh ( 196118 ) on Wednesday August 03, 2011 @09:15AM (#36971410) Homepage

    Yes, the reason here seems to be GPL-related, and nothing to do with Oracle and Java. Postgresql uses an MIT/X11 style license. MySQL is GPL. This is a trend at Apple.

    The reason, ironically, is probably the GPLv3's anti-patent clauses. My hypothesis is that Apple's lawyers have picked up on this and it's now company policy to avoid GPLv3 software in their stack, at any cost.

  • by Sloppy ( 14984 ) on Wednesday August 03, 2011 @11:13AM (#36973044) Homepage Journal

    The whole TIVO clause is nothing more than "I don't like what you're doing with my software I said was free, so I'm making it less free, and calling it more free".

    More like "I don't like that you've taken software that I tried to make perpetually user-auditable and user-maintainable, and found a way to prevent users from having the capacity to audit or maintain it."

    As soon as you look at the question in terms of "less free" or "more free" you will get it wrong. It's not about degrees of freedom; it's about whose freedom when there's a conflict. GPL3 looks at the situation where developers' and users' interests conflict, and like Tron, fights for the users.

    This is dead simple to understand if you go back and look at the roots of all this stuff. RMS wasn't just a programmer; he was a guy who had a printer that he wanted to use. It is really cool that a lot of programmers have followed his ideals, but dudes, it's not for us. It's for them (the people who hire us) because we recognize that sometimes we're them. Unless you're totally building all your computers out of transistors from the ground up, you're always one of "them," to some degree.

  • by Jeremy Allison - Sam ( 8157 ) on Wednesday August 03, 2011 @03:28PM (#36975930) Homepage

    Creepy wrote:

    "GPL3 is a (commercial) plague - anything that uses any GPL3 library MUST comply by GPL3 and any license that is not GPL3 becomes GPL3, so Apple had to abandon SAMBA - if they integrate a SAMBA interfacing gui into their OS (which they did under GPL2), they immediately are required to release the entire OS under the GPL."

    Can I have some of your 'shrooms please, they must be *really* good :-).

    This is so far from the truth it's easier just to point at this: []

    and hope people read it than to try and rebut your ravings.


"Never face facts; if you do, you'll never get up in the morning." -- Marlo Thomas