Mac OS and iPhone OS based on the linux kernel?

[nax3000]

I've heard this before.. can anyone confirm this?
What I've heard is basically that's it's a highly modified version of linux. Wondering if that's true.
________
Avandia heart attack (http://classactionsettlements.org/)

[b-man]

Mac OSX and Iphone OS run on the XNU kernel, which is a mix of the mach microkernel and the BSD monolithic kernel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XNU ;)

[anonym]

Mac OS X and the iPhone OS are Darwin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_%28operating_system%29) underneath, which is based on BSD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD) and NeXTSTEP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXTSTEP). They're both Unix-like (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix-like) systems, so they do have some things in common, but Linux doesn't share any code with Darwin/BSD.

[mrebanza]

but LINUX was based on UNIX as an open source and free alternative . . . UNIX is basically a commercial version of Linux . . .
A Linux-based system is a modular Unix-like operating system. It derives much of its basic design from principles established in Unix during the 1970s and 1980s. Such a system uses a monolithic kernel, the Linux kernel, which handles process control, networking, and peripheral and file system access. Device drivers are either integrated directly with the kernel or added as modules loaded while the system is running.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux

[dalonso]

but LINUX was based on UNIX as an open source and free alternative . . . UNIX is basically a commercial version of Linux . . .



No, you are wrong. Indeed, your quote of wikipedia says nothing about UNIX being a commercial version o Linux. It says "unix-like".

In fact, Linux means "Linux is not Unix".

UNIX is not really an operating system: It could better be understood as a set of tools which names, options and behaviours must be respected in order for an Operating System being called of Unix flavour.

Solaris is a Unix flavour, BSD is a Unix flavour, MacOS X is a Unix flavour, SCO is/was a Unix flavour.

Linux+GNU tools is not a Unix flavour, as it has never been certified as so. It's more of an "emulator" that tries to be compliant to Unix but without being Unix.

[poleepkwa]

No, you are wrong. Indeed, your quote of wikipedia says nothing about UNIX being a commercial version o Linux. It says "unix-like".

In fact, Linux means "Linux is not Unix".

UNIX is not really an operating system: It could better be understood as a set of tools which names, options and behaviours must be respected in order for an Operating System being called of Unix flavour.

Solaris is a Unix flavour, BSD is a Unix flavour, MacOS X is a Unix flavour, SCO is/was a Unix flavour.

Linux+GNU tools is not a Unix flavour, as it has never been certified as so. It's more of an "emulator" that tries to be compliant to Unix but without being Unix.

Linus Torvalds wanted to call the kernel he developed Freax (a combination of "free",and the letter X to indicate that it is a Unix-like system). Ari Lemmke, who administered the FTP server where the kernel was first hosted for downloading, named Torvalds' directory Linux.

[TA-t3]

Linux+GNU tools is not a Unix flavour, as it has never been certified as so. It's more of an "emulator" that tries to be compliant to Unix but without being Unix.
Actually it was certified as a Unix flavour, at one point. It was done by SuSE I believe, many years ago (around 2.0 IIRC). Against SUSV2 I think. And also against POSIX.1 around the same time.
These certifications don't automatically keep up with new versions though, so it would have to be re-certified for later versions and I don't think that did happen.

[h3llraz0r]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCwN4Vk_vi4

[fatalsaint]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCwN4Vk_vi4

ROFL...

"We're good, you're not."
"We get laid, and you don't."

[Justin Buser]

No, you are wrong. Indeed, your quote of wikipedia says nothing about UNIX being a commercial version o Linux. It says "unix-like".

In fact, Linux means "Linux is not Unix".

UNIX is not really an operating system: It could better be understood as a set of tools which names, options and behaviours must be respected in order for an Operating System being called of Unix flavour.

Solaris is a Unix flavour, BSD is a Unix flavour, MacOS X is a Unix flavour, SCO is/was a Unix flavour.

Linux+GNU tools is not a Unix flavour, as it has never been certified as so. It's more of an "emulator" that tries to be compliant to Unix but without being Unix.

YOU are wrong and shouldn't correct people when you don't know what the F you're talking about.

1.) Linux DOES NOT mean "Linux is not Unix", the word Linux is derived from a combination of UNIX and it's inventors first name: Linus.

2.) UNIX absolutely is an Operating System in and of itself, the original UNIX Operating System was called exactly that, "UNIX". The fact that there are many variations doesn't nullify the existence of the original.

3.) MacOS X is as much a "Unix flavour" as Windows is, it is the latest version of an object oriented piece of crap operating system that was originally called NeXTSTEP. The only similarities it has to an actual Linux/UNIX distribution are the various pieces of code that Steve Jobs stole from FreeBSD.

4.) "Linux+GNU tools is not a Unix flavour, as it has never been certified as so. It's more of an "emulator" that tries to be compliant to Unix but without being Unix." Wow, I honestly think reading this just made me dumber, my brain is throwing a fit trying to add up the number of ways this statement is flat out idiotic. Keep your verbal diarrhea to yourself or go correct people on sesamestreet.com where you may actually have a chance of finding someone who knows less than you do.

[erendorn]

3.) MacOS X is as much a "Unix flavour" as Windows is, it is the latest version of an object oriented piece of crap operating system that was originally called NeXTSTEP. The only similarities it has to an actual Linux/UNIX distribution are the various pieces of code that Steve Jobs stole from FreeBSD.

4.) "Linux+GNU tools is not a Unix flavour, as it has never been certified as so. It's more of an "emulator" that tries to be compliant to Unix but without being Unix." Wow, I honestly think reading this just made me dumber, my brain is throwing a fit trying to add up the number of ways this statement is flat out idiotic. Keep your verbal diarrhea to yourself or go correct people on sesamestreet.com where you may actually have a chance of finding someone who knows less than you do.

woah, easy on the hate, and easier on the bulls***t (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification#Registered_UNIX_systems) .
Mac OS X is POSIX compliant (http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3581.htm), and Linux flavors typically do not get certified (because of the costs).