News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”. Parent comment

Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by viraptor on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @06:07AM (#25760592)
You can be "cross-platform" in many ways. In practice if you don't run MacOS yourself, there's just no reasonable way to support MacOS at all. It literally costs hundreds of dollars to get a compatible test environment, while most other systems (including Windows) you can download and run a in VM for free.

In practice if the MacOS support takes more than a quick headers / types update, it will likely need more care in the future as well. That means you need not just a driveby fix, but a continued commitment from someone to ensure compatibility. This is not out of hostility towards the users, but I'll keep calling things that don't work on MacOS cross-platform. (Yes, it sucks; You can vote with your money to stop that situation)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by cesarb on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @07:34AM (#25761216)
> It literally costs hundreds of dollars to get a compatible test environment, while most other systems (including Windows) you can download and run a in VM for free.

Not even that; I've developed for Windows using Wine plus a mingw cross-compiler packaged by the Linux distribution I was using. Another alternative would be ReactOS in a VM.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by murphy1312 on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @06:57AM (#25760964)
agreed, as a developer i don't need an android device to test, just open a simulator and most things will work. on the other hand you cant even compile for ios with a linux/windows pc.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by SSLy on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @07:14AM (#25761067)
You can put OS X in a Windows or Linux hosted hypervisor, but the Apple doesn't want you to know about it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by viraptor on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @07:25AM (#25761144)
You can, but it's illegal. You're only allowed to virtualise MacOS on MacOS host. You also have to obtain the system which as far as I can tell you can't buy anymore - you can only upgrade to.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by SSLy on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @07:26AM (#25761154)
Just because something is unauthorized or breaks EULA (mostly void here in EU anyway) doesn't mean it's illegal.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by viraptor on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @07:37AM (#25761240)
Even if you don't expect EULA to be enforced (will you pay for my lawyers/fine if it is?), you still need a copy of the system which you can't buy directly. You're left with unauthorised copies if you don't have any MacOS hardware and the same question - would you cover my legal costs?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by jaywalk on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @10:08AM (#25762856)
You can download MacOS directly from Apple for free.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by viraptor on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @04:09PM (#25767983)
How do you legally download Big Sur without having an existing Mac machine? I thought that option was gone for some time now. A quick search doesn't bring up good solutions.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by gruez on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @12:50PM (#25765529)
On the flip side, why would it be legal? It's looks like a pretty cut case of copyright infringement. It's their software, you're not authorized to use it, but you're using it anyways.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by realusername on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @07:42AM (#25761282)
First it's illegal but secondly the performance is atrocious anyways (at least last time I've tried) so it won't even help you that much.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by Lievelingsduif on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @08:09AM (#25761491)
Hackintoshes break the TOS last time I checked.

Some stuff can be built for Macs from Linux, stuff like the Godot game engine supports this.

It is however a guess if they're going to allow that build or not.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by snuxoll on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @11:52AM (#25764635)
Godot doesn’t build Mac binaries on Linux, the export templates provided include the platform native binaries.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by pfranz on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @11:41PM (#25772117)
> In practice if you don't run MacOS yourself, there's just no reasonable way to support MacOS at all.

I think this is the key insight. I tried to do a similar thing with Windows. The free VM expired every 30 days or so and bootstrapping a build environment each time (even just downloading it) sucked. The build environment is an outlier compared to macOS/Linux/Unix. I eventually ended up paying for Windows. I still couldn't test things like OpenGL inside a VM.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by mschuster91 on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @08:06AM (#25761465)
> while most other systems (including Windows) you can download and run a in VM for free.

For what it's worth there are many "click and run" virtual machine creators for OS X. It's not acceptable for corporate use because of the license violations, but to be honest I see very little issue for open source developers using such a solution if they don't have a Mac.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac ... by Lievelingsduif on Wednesday January 13, 2021 @08:10AM (#25761499)
The problem is that you're not a reviewer at apple, or an apple lawyer...
[ Parent | on HN ]