this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2026

29 points (96.8% liked)

Technology

42839 readers

216 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

remington@beehaw.org

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

coldredlight@beehaw.org

SemioticStandard@beehaw.org

Is the Darwin kernel, used in macOS and iOS, really open source? (fedia.io)

submitted 1 day ago by ryujin470@fedia.io to c/technology@beehaw.org

20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I heard that it has proprietary components like the init system (launchd).

top 20 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] cadekat@pawb.social 31 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There is a distinction between "kernel" and "operating system". An operating system includes a kernel, but also other stuff.

The kernel of the darwin operating system, called XNU, is open source. Darwin, the operating system that includes the XNU kernel, is not fully open source.

[+] rumschlumpel@feddit.org -6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Are drivers part of the kernel? In Linux they are, which means the Linux kernel is not (fully) open source.

[–] who@feddit.org 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

No, it does not mean that.

[–] forestbeasts@pawb.social 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

To expand on this, for Linux, most of the drivers are actually open source!

For the other stuff, there are "kernel modules", that the kernel loads and runs in kernel space (just like how user programs can load libraries to do stuff). So they're part of the kernel in that sense, but not necessarily open source. But that doesn't mean the kernel isn't open source at all, just that it might, optionally, be running other code that's proprietary.

(Most kernel modules are open source, too. It's only a few weird ones like Nvidia's proprietary driver that aren't.)

[–] rumschlumpel@feddit.org -2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

There's a reason why I wrote "not (fully) open source". Some drivers that get shipped with the Linux kernel aren't open source and it's very hard to completely avoid proprietary drivers.

[–] forestbeasts@pawb.social 12 points 1 day ago

By "shipped with the kernel", do you mean by the kernel people? Or just by distros?

Because I don't think the kernel people ship anything proprietary. Distros do, because distros are in the business of actually putting together a functional operating system, but that doesn't make the kernel nonfree any more than some distros shipping Steam by default makes the kernel nonfree. (Personally I like that our distro of choice doesn't ship Steam preinstalled, but I like having nonfree wifi firmware on the install disc because it's really hard to get wifi drivers when you don't have working wifi.)

-- Frost

[–] TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

For example, Debian and Fedora don’t ship with proprietary drivers. The user is still able to install those later, making the OS partially closed source.

Some distros, like Bazzite, give you the proprietary drivers during installation, which makes those partially closed source out of the box.

[–] rumschlumpel@feddit.org -3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Quite a few people seem to disagree.

[–] AckPhttt@beehaw.org 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Specifically how?

[–] rumschlumpel@feddit.org -2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Some important drivers are not FOSS, thus making the standard Linux kernel not FOSS if you use Stallman's definition.

[–] AckPhttt@beehaw.org 2 points 1 day ago

I think your vague wording is implying that the non-standard Linux kernel is not FOSS. But, you've been maximally non-specific.

[–] cadekat@pawb.social 3 points 1 day ago

Are you talking firmware blobs, or actual drivers? If it's the latter, do you have a link? I'm curious!

[–] The_Decryptor@aussie.zone 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Who are these people who think drivers can't be open source?

[–] rumschlumpel@feddit.org 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No one said they can't be. But in the real world, drivers for some classes of devices only come in closed-source. I'm using the GNU project's/RMS's definition of FOSS here.

[–] The_Decryptor@aussie.zone 1 points 1 day ago

Are you talking about firmware?

[–] hobata@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

Well, explain first what you mean by Linux.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 7 points 1 day ago

unless apple is doing something weird, the init system is a program, not part of the kernel.

[–] maam@feddit.uk 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s the most profitable desktop os for a reason.

[–] highduc@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What's the reason?

[–] maam@feddit.uk 1 points 20 hours ago

Probably has something to do with the hardware and appstore like people buying Final Cut Pro.