Forums | MacLife

Is X11 supposed to come standard with your Mac? I searched the iMac dad brought from the office, it was in disuse, 10.5.8 and it seems to have it installed already.

Bear with me guys, your answers are helping, but I'm still confused.

So... Was X11 or KDE therefore translating calls from Linux apps, thus enabling them to run in OS X, despite the fact that I hadn't actually installed Linux?

I'm not saying I definitely didn't install Linux, but now that I think about it, I don't recall having to do so at any point. You'd think I'd remember the name of a Linux distro, if one had been involved.

So...

This isn't too different from using Cider or WINE to run Windows apps or games in OS X, yes-no?

That is to say, it all comes down to the translation of calls?

Thank you! I am finally beginning to understand.

Warning about installing Linux on your Mac, I did it and now I am having trouble getting MacOS X back installed.
I'd use a virtual machine, that's what I intend to do from now on.

Huh? Where'd you get that idea?

.tsooJ

Some apps have dependencies. An X server is one example.

.tsooJ

Alien wrote:

No, you're not.

There isn't any translation going on. Since Mac OS X is Unix, and Linux is Unix-like, a properly designed application can simply be compiled for either system and run natively on it.

.tsooJ

OK, so this statement, along with the subsequent posts, has me thinking...

Let's see if I'm understanding you...

You're saying that in a perfect world, a Linux app could just be "compiled" to run in OS X without X11, KDE, of X-window? And if it does need those things to run, that means it has "dependencies" on them?

And now I'm going to really go out on a limb and reveal my newbyness by admitting the following:

I've sometimes seen OS X and Linux apps and games out there on the Web that I'd like to download and try, but the only problem is the developers haven't made a version available with the normal kind of installer or drag-and-drop installation one would expect to find.

Instead, they instruct you to download resources of some sort and then compile them. I know I should know how to do this, but I don't. Could somebody direct me to a fun 'n' easy tutorial on how to compile stuff?

And as long as I'm asking, what is meant by "compiling my kernel?" I used to be acquainted with this dude who was a hardcore tweaker (the drug kind) and a hardcore tweaker (the Linux kind). Whenever he'd disappear for days on end or be mysteriously unavailable, I would joke with our mutual friends that he was probably compiling his kernel.

Which was funny, 'cause he was probably masturbating, and "compiling his kernel" kinda sounds like a euphemism.

The only thing is, I had no idea what I was really saying. I just knew that whatever it was, he did seem to do an awful lot of it.

Bren wrote:

Alien wrote:

No, you're not.

There isn't any translation going on. Since Mac OS X is Unix, and Linux is Unix-like, a properly designed application can simply be compiled for either system and run natively on it.

OK, so this statement, along with the subsequent posts, has me thinking...

Let's see if I'm understanding you...

You're saying that in a perfect world, a Linux app could just be "compiled" to run in OS X without X11, KDE, of X-window? And if it does need those things to run, that means it has "dependencies" on them?

Pretty much, yeah.

And now I'm going to really go out on a limb and reveal my newbyness by admitting the following:

I've sometimes seen OS X and Linux apps and games out there on the Web that I'd like to download and try, but the only problem is the developers haven't made a version available with the normal kind of installer or drag-and-drop installation one would expect to find.

... in the Mac world.

Instead, they instruct you to download resources of some sort and then compile them. I know I should know how to do this, but I don't. Could somebody direct me to a fun 'n' easy tutorial on how to compile stuff?

Well, in the aforementioned perfect world, the creator has included a "make" file, which is a script that'll tell your system what to do to compile the application for your system. So you'd unpack it into a directory, and then simply instruct your computer to

make this_app_i_just_downloaded

which will build the app for your system. Of course, in the real world, things rarely work as smoothly. Especially if you're compiling the app for another system than the creator's favourite distro or even, *gasp* a non-Linux system!! (Linux users are eerily like Windows users, in that respect.)

And as long as I'm asking, what is meant by "compiling my kernel?" I used to be acquainted with this dude who was a hardcore tweaker (the drug kind) and a hardcore tweaker (the Linux kind). Whenever he'd disappear for days on end or be mysteriously unavailable, I would joke with our mutual friends that he was probably compiling his kernel.

Which was funny, 'cause he was probably masturbating, and "compiling his kernel" kinda sounds like a euphemism.

The only thing is, I had no idea what I was really saying. I just knew that whatever it was, he did seem to do an awful lot of it.

Compiling your kernel is rebuilding the core (kernel) of your OS to better taylor it to your specific computer configuration. Especially in Linux, everything is compiled into the kernel, from network interface support to video support. That means that, in order to work on as many different systems as possible, a generic Linux kernel has drivers for just about every video card and Ethernet interface known to man built into it. That's a lot of waste. It takes up disk space, uses memory when running and may contain bugs that ruin your day. So what you do is take the kernel source, switch off support for everything you don't have on your system, and compile it. Presto: taylor made kernel that'll only work on your system, but is highly efficient. On top of that, you can apply additional tweaks, like optimizing compiler output to specifically target your exact CPU model, etc.

.tsooJ