Re: What would be the most complete GNUStep system?

[Asiga Nael]

On Thursday, October 30, 2014 5:12 AM, James Carthew <jcarthew@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Realistically GNUStep is not ready to replace OSX by a long way.

Well, my idea isn't to replace OSX, but choosing my next OS. When I moved to 
OSX, I got new stuff I never had before, like app bundles, fat binaries, and 
tight OS integration of disk images. I'd like to keep all this stuff in my next 
OS. Otherwise, it will an step backwards for me (in terms of comfort and 
productivity).

Btw, there's another ingredient I forgot to mention, which makes me try to 
avoid Linux if possible: binary compatibility between different distributions. 
I sometimes need to provide applications in binary form. This is easily done on 
both OSX and Windows, but on Linux it's a hard issue (there was some initiative 
for binary compatibility on Linux some time ago). I'm not sure about the BSD 
derivatives in this aspect.

From the comments, I realize Darwin is hardly an option. But I think the Mach 
kernel would be a great choice for me, because of fat binaries. Is there any 
other OS apart from OSX/Darwin that also uses the Mach kernel?

I feel like I'd be happy with a NeXTstep clone. If anybody had done with 
NeXTstep the same as Linus made with UNIX, I think I'd already moved to it. In 
the very same moment that Apple released Lion :-)

asiga