Aqua-Soft ForumsIs there or is someone making a total GUI for the Linux Kernel?
@Constrasutra
:shy: OK im not gunna piss you off!
LINUX HAS NO GUI, LINUX IS ONLY A KERNEL, IT DOESNT EVEN HAVE A COMMAND LINE!
OK!
[Query] Os X Gui For The Linux Kernel
The Linux kernel will never have a GUI or a command line, because there is nothing to manipulate in it. Its just a set of basic I/O code. It controls everything on the most basic level.
PS. shouldnt this be in another section. *cough*
PPS. Your right Duckie, PM is better. 
god i suck!!!
Originally posted by contrasutra@Jun 8 2003, 09:24 PMThe Linux kernel will never have a GUI or a command line, because there is nothing to manipulate in it. Its just a set of basic I/O code. It controls everything on the most basic level.
PS. shouldnt this be in another section. *cough*
PPS. Your right Duckie, PM is better.
You never answered his question, which I have also wondered myself. Is there a Mac OS gui for linux? Has one ever been created, or even attempted is the real question.
What I said was that there CANT be ANY GUI for linux, so if NO gui can exist, an OSX gui cant possibly.
oh, dont be so picky <_<
I'm sure he meant something like KDE or Gnome - an environment?
KDE has the capability of having the menubar on top, if you didn't already know..
we could make our own distribution... aquanix 
It would have a descriptive file system instead of silly little 3 letter words, and it would have a desktop enviroment from heaven. and it work on all our pcs.
Sounds like an OS from heaven?
just dreamin'
fissy
I think the question is whether a quartz like GUI could be made for it and yes it could be as linux is just a kernal. But you'd have to dump legacy support making a new window server and gui api's and then have a X server that runs on it for X application just like OSX does to run those applications.
With openGL xfree could possibly do it. But you'd need to make a new toolkit and window manager that looks just like quartz. But then of course you'd need to recode apps or make new ones.
It would have a descriptive file system instead of silly little 3 letter words, and it would have a desktop enviroment from heaven. and it work on all our pcs.Sounds like an OS from heaven?
Sounds like Marklar. Thats basically what Apple did, take BSD, add descriptive file systems and a beautiful GUI. They lost compatability though, as smoke said.
Taha, it was a movement against ignorance. What you people should be saying (and I should be too), is GNU/Linux, not just "linux". I generally dont get on peoples back, but when they dont understand that linux is just a kernel, I start to get l33t.
i understand that linux is just a kernel.. but where and how linux is advancing.. the term people use is jsut linux very often
even on linux commercials talking about servers the people dont say "GNU LINUX blah blah blah"
they jsut say linux....... and i dont think you can run a server with just a linux kernel.. you need all that other gnu stuff to complete the OS
but really i personaly think saying Linux will jsut do it... i mean the term is going for the whole OS now... catagorize it into one
but if you say Gui for the Linux KERNEL.. well then.. you can start going "l33t" as you put it.
-bolero
Except OSX still has three letter extensions.
Well, your right, the beauty of OSX is that they kept POSIX compliancy, by not changing the (very intuitive) unix dir. structure, but they just symlinked everything, which is the best way to do it.
Check out GOBOLINUX if you want a new directory structure (symlinked of course).
and dont you think the GNU organization deserves credit? Remember, the kernel was written FOR GNU, not the other way around. GNU makes up 97% of a distribution, by the way.
Dude, you are the f***ing Linux expert on this forum!!! We dont all know what the kernel does, but thanx to you we all are gunna have to have a better understanding of the Kernel!
All im saying is...
KDE and GNOME are both desktop enviroments (Thanx @taha). Kinda like Windows 3.1 over DOS ONLY DOS has a GUI (Better Constrasutra?) So... Why cant someone just mimick the OS X GUI and icons to a Linux OS Kernel...
I know i got some of this wrong so constrasutra might rasie hell... Don't hurt me :shy:
No, everything you said was correct.
Sorry to get all stupid on you, I normally dont "mind" when people just say "linux (I do), but when they dont understand what linux actually is, then I take it upon me to "enlighten them" 
Anyway, to answer your QUESTION, NO, no one is trying to design an OSX Desktop Environment.
You can try WindowMaker, its meant to emulation the NeXTstep objects, including a dock and many other things that OSX borrowed. Its dock really is just as functional, if not more than the OSX dock, especially considering theres 1000s of Dock Apps.
Also, I have recently switched to XFCE4, and it beautiful, ill post a shot maybe. And it has a "dock", though not as functional.
So you are able to find OSX-like things in the linux world, but no DE devoted to it.
a better choice that WindowMaker is AfterSTEP. I used AfterSTEP way before windowmaker was created and gnome was only a concept, it is good, this is a blurb from their webpage....
AfterStep is a window manager for the UnixX Window System. Originally based on the
look and feel of the NeXTStep interface,
it has evolved into its own creature, with
interest expressed by GNUstep, to make
AfterStep the window manager of
choice for X11.
the url is AfterSTEP
ive actually posted this somewhere before. there is a window manager designed entirely to look like mac os. unfortuanly its based on classic. its a cool thought to have a window manager based on osx, and im very surprised it hasn't been done, but im also somewhat used to the days before kde and gnome when everything you touched had a different window manager, and there were new ones all the time
I know, why don't we make a Mac OS X window manager (kinda like XPDE except aqua style)
I would but I don't know how 
Ok, I'll bite....
Making xfree (this is what you are talking about not linux per say as this could be run on BSD or something) look like OSX isn't as simple as making a window manager. These are the things you need to do (there might be more but off the top of my head there is the list):
You need both a window manager and a toolkit that does the same, including the background. Make a postscript or postscript like drawing library with full alpha blending. GTK2 for example only seems to alpha blend up to the background. The current ones don't quite look like OSX. You need to make a new one, and port your apps to it and recode some apps to take advantage of the menubar at top. You need to be able to render drop shadows so you can put them around anything instead of hardcoding into the theme. You also need to make different parts of the window transperizable from other parts.
You need to make 2 kinds of toolkits and possibly window managers, one that does aqua style, and the other that does itunes style. But still, I have the distinct feeling that xfree without heavy modification (like the opengl version, which I'm not sre about whether it just puts a full window into a polygon which would make only a whole window transerpizable or if it breaks up the primitives into polygons) is not particularly suited for this kind of desktop especially with the present toolkits. Meaning, all the alpha blending most DE's only have blending to the desktop or over the window bg not over overlapping windows and especially not different parts of of the window seperate from each other (no the fake transparency in terminals doesn't count).
Not for lack of trying though, for rendering, the enlightenment team has imlib2\evas for E17 but they don't have alpha blended titlebars the last time I checked. This kind of work isn't simple. especially if you are working on it for free on xfree.
Perhaps if you took the E17 work and worked on it on a different server and do the above you can do it. But of course by the time you are done, Apple probably would come out with something better, lol.
Of course you can also just make a theme for the current desktop environments and window managers of course that wouldn't hit the goal of what the above would be. =Þ
The xpde (not xpwm take note) people have the advantage of doing a simpler look\feel no alpha and not having to do much bundled apps. Also there are toolkits that look pretty much like classic windows and the look is more win2k than anything.
BTW Well it's not like XP has any advantage when it comes to alpha blending different parts of the window seperate from each other anyway. Not being able to have a 32-bit titlebar is a glaring thing to me.
Wed Apr 9 - benr - Raster puts weight of E behind XCBRaster has decided to put some push behind the XCB project. You can see his original message here. So run over and grab the source, play with it, and get crackin'.
And don't forget, we are still seeking a variety of developers of various different skillsets, particularly to work on EWL. Work is being done on DR16.5 for a possible 16.6 release, so patches are welcome and encouraged, but get them in soon. And as always, the more code written using the libs the more there is for others to benefit from, so grab the libs (Ecore and EVAS particularly) and just build some kool apps.
Guess what I found out. Off screen rendering is going to be in XFree v.5. This will allow both real TRANSPARENCY and any screenshot (expose) type effects. I can't wait. Though it could be a long time.
And there is also a postscript rendering plugin for X already out. So it is possible to create a PDF environment like OSX, though w/o the transparency, it will suck.
Does anyone know how long apple was at it when making aqua? It seems to me that there should be some project to recreate aqua but for x86, just like there are several projects to recreate BeOS. Considering that aqua runs atop of bds(freebsd) it should just be a matter of a dedicated team of developers to put their heads together and make it happen.
Just a thought!
it should just be a matter of a dedicated team of developers to put their heads together and make it happen.
Hate to be the disenting voice here but, IMHO I doubt that this will ever happen.
Why? Because the start of this very thread is your clue starter for one point.
It took 6 posts to answer the question. "Is there or is someone making a total GUI for the Linux Kernel?"
That is in esence all that is wrong, so very wrong with the GNU/Linux movement.
Far too absorbed in getting every little detail correct instead of using a little common sence and just saying..... "Not the kernal.... but an enviroment... maybe"
So the point of this is, What makes you think that a team of developers could even agree on what the GUI/Enviroment would be, in the time scale that would keep ordinary people interested?
Wow.. I think if someone has something to sayon this topic then I'm just happier to read it
OSX is unix, so what would be the point?
The simple truth is that no programmer cares about OSX and Aqua, otherwise they would be using a mac. We are the few.
The only group that I could concieve doing it is the WindowMaker team. They try to emulate neXT, and since OSX is kind of "the next version", they might be interested.
Originally posted by contrasutra@Jul 3 2003, 01:08 AMOSX is unix, so what would be the point?
The simple truth is that no programmer cares about OSX and Aqua, otherwise they would be using a mac. We are the few.
If that were right there wouldn't have been so many laptops at previous unix/linux conferences running osx, and there would not have been so many efforts in effect to recompile all available linux apps for osx. I still think that if someone has the courage to put together a project to duplicate osx framework under linux it could be done.