![install gnu bash on mac os install gnu bash on mac os](https://www.architectryan.com/static/image-c9a7ee0b44f9f2baee48566a1beb5d27-be1c0.png)
> unless they provided the OS-level signing keys on requestĪll they need is to provide a bypass which permits executing a modified binary, which they already do otherwise projects like Homebrew and MacPorts wouldn't be possible, not to mention the fact that development on macOS would become a nightmare.įrom a technical and legal perspective there's no reason to avoid the GPLv3 for a program like GNU Make.
![install gnu bash on mac os install gnu bash on mac os](https://opensource.com/sites/default/files/lead-images/bash_command_line.png)
Instead, it's that shipping GPLv3 Make/Coreutils would prevent Apple from locking down their computers and code-signing MacOS (unless they provided the OS-level signing keys on request). So it's not that shipping GPLv3 Make/Coreutils would infect MacOS and require Apple to release the MacOS source. But that requirement prevents a hardware vendor from doing something like saying "I'll only boot a signed/verified root filesystem" or "The rootfs (or even just /usr) is read-only to everything except for signed OS updates". Check out the GPLv3's "User Product" and "Installation Information" sections for more details - they're written in plain English, and are pretty clear.īasically - if you want to sell hardware that comes with any GPLv3 software installed, then you need to empower your customers to replace or modify that software on their devices.
#Install gnu bash on mac os install
If MacOS included GPLv3 software, Apple wouldn't be able to pre-install it unless they provided all users with signing keys to install their own modified versions of the GPLv3 software on-target. The license incompatibility isn't intrinsic to MacOS, it's intrinsic to Apple's computers. And computers that ship with Ubuntu don't violate GPLv3, because you can install anything you want on them without restriction. Ubuntu itself isn't a valid comparison, because it's not a physical product. The Tivoization clause applies to hardware vendors, with hardware covered by GPLv3's definition of a "User Product".