It seems zenity won't display if a different user is logged in. For example running it as a single line from /etc/rc.local won't bring up a popup. It may not have worked well with at either. Does anyone have a suggestion which works well with at and can be called from /etc/rc.local? I have everything else working for the public access box. Just not the notification. I figure we can leave the notification routing for a week and just post a note.
Later Mike
On 12/10/2009 06:39 PM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
It seems zenity won't display if a different user is logged in. For example running it as a single line from /etc/rc.local won't bring up a popup. It may not have worked well with at either. Does anyone have a suggestion which works well with at and can be called from /etc/rc.local? I have everything else working for the public access box. Just not the notification. I figure we can leave the notification routing for a week and just post a note.
Is it not working because DISPLAY is unset, or some other reason?
Try adding --display=:0.0 to the zenity arguments.
Peter
Peter O'Gorman wrote:
On 12/10/2009 06:39 PM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
It seems zenity won't display if a different user is logged in. Forexample running it as a single line from /etc/rc.local won't bring up a popup. It may not have worked well with at either. Does anyone have a suggestion which works well with at and can be called from /etc/rc.local? I have everything else working for the public access box. Just not the notification. I figure we can leave the notification routing for a week and just post a note.
Is it not working because DISPLAY is unset, or some other reason?
Try adding --display=:0.0 to the zenity arguments.
That did the trick. Thank you. The cool thing is because rc.local is executed as soon as it goes into mode 5 the message and shut down occur regardless. Even if nobody logsin or if they logout and login again. The only way around it is to reboot. That is so obvious other people will notice. Plus it does pretty much the same thing we wanted anyway.
I'm sure this will be of no interest to the "*NIX heavyweights" of the group. For everybody else here is the code I plan to add to the machine...
***** rm -rf /home/guest cp /root/guest.tar /home cd /home tar -xvf guest.tar rm guest.tar cd - echo 'zenity --info --display=:0.0 --text="This computer will automatically turn off in five minutes." --width=150' | at now +25 minutes echo 'shutdown -h now' | at now +30 minutes *****
This presumes a pre-existing guest account which has had its home directory tarred to guest.tar. Then the tar file is stored in the (inaccessible to unprivileged users) /root directory.
Incidentally the zenity line is all one line. the line before uses the dash/minus sign to return to the previous directory.
I may also have to tweak the width a little.
Peter
Thanks again everybody.
Later Mike
On 12/10/2009 08:43 PM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
I'm sure this will be of no interest to the "*NIX heavyweights" of the group. For everybody else here is the code I plan to add to the machine...
rm -rf /home/guest cp /root/guest.tar /home cd /home tar -xvf guest.tar rm guest.tar cd - echo 'zenity --info --display=:0.0 --text="This computer will automatically turn off in five minutes." --width=150' | at now +25 minutes echo 'shutdown -h now' | at now +30 minutes
You could replace lines 2-6 in that script with:
tar xf /root/guest.tar -C /home
No need to do the cd's and cp/rm, as tar can do the cd and the cp is unnecessary. You don't really need the v option to tar if this is running from rc.local. You could also save a little space by using the z argument to tar (for both the create and extract phases) and storing the home directory copy in guest.tgz.
Gilles Detillieux wrote:
On 12/10/2009 08:43 PM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
I'm sure this will be of no interest to the "*NIX heavyweights" of the group. For everybody else here is the code I plan to add to the machine...
rm -rf /home/guest cp /root/guest.tar /home cd /home tar -xvf guest.tar rm guest.tar cd - echo 'zenity --info --display=:0.0 --text="This computer will automatically turn off in five minutes." --width=150' | at now +25 minutes echo 'shutdown -h now' | at now +30 minutes
You could replace lines 2-6 in that script with:
tar xf /root/guest.tar -C /home
No need to do the cd's and cp/rm, as tar can do the cd and the cp is unnecessary. You don't really need the v option to tar if this is running from rc.local. You could also save a little space by using the z argument to tar (for both the create and extract phases) and storing the home directory copy in guest.tgz.
I followed Glens advice from last night. I could cut two lines down to one if I used the code you provided.
There is plenty of hard drive space on the machine. It only has two accounts and the one which will be used most often gets wiped at startup. I'll probably have to redo some of the options and re-tar the directory. It seems as though some of the users can't find the gnome start menu. I'll probably have to put a link to Firefox on the desktop as well. <sigh>
The guy who spent all day on the machine last week left after a couple of hours today. He doesn't want to use it if there is a second machine around. ;-)
Later Mike
Since OS X sort of qualifies as *NIX here goes...
When upgrading an Intel Mac from 10.4 to 10.6 I was able to skip 10.5 by using the $40 (after tax) upgrade package instead of the $200 complete package Apple wants 10.4 users to buy. It's been running for three or four days now with no serious problems. I just had to manually download newer versions of a couple of third party programs.
They've finally implemented something like the pager. They call it Open Spaces. By default it gives the user four virtual screens.
Later Mike
On 12/16/2009 09:10 PM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
They've finally implemented something like the pager. They call it Open Spaces. By default it gives the user four virtual screens.
Spaces was in 10.5 too :)
Peter
On 2009-12-16, at 9:15 PM, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
On 12/16/2009 09:10 PM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
They've finally implemented something like the pager. They call it Open Spaces. By default it gives the user four virtual screens.
Spaces was in 10.5 too :)
Peter
Like I said, I didn't have 10.5. ;-) now I know.
Later Mike
I was at the Apple store yesterday, asking about Snow Leopard. I had understood earlier that it was an 'upgrade' from Leopard - but the guy in the store says it's a complete OS and has no previous requirements (except the firmware, I assume).
So there is also one being sold for $200?
-Dan
On 16-Dec-09, at 9:10 PM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
Since OS X sort of qualifies as *NIX here goes...
When upgrading an Intel Mac from 10.4 to 10.6 I was able to skip 10.5 by using the $40 (after tax) upgrade package instead of the $200 complete package Apple wants 10.4 users to buy. It's been running for three or four days now with no serious problems. I just had to manually download newer versions of a couple of third party programs.
They've finally implemented something like the pager. They call it Open Spaces. By default it gives the user four virtual screens.
Later Mike
Roundtable mailing list Roundtable@muug.mb.ca http://www.muug.mb.ca/mailman/listinfo/roundtable
Dan Martin GP Hospital Practitioner Computer Scientist ummar143@shaw.ca (204) 831-1746 answering machine always on
I was at the Apple store yesterday, asking about Snow Leopard. I had understood earlier that it was an 'upgrade' from Leopard - but the guy in the store says it's a complete OS and has no previous requirements (except the firmware, I assume).
So there is also one being sold for $200?
Snow Leopard is available as an upgrade or as a bundled license with purchase of new hardware. To purchase it as an upgrade, you must be running Mac OS X on an Intel CPU, which implicitly limits the offer to owners of Mac OS X 10.4 or newer only. If you purchased a machine running 10.5 after June 8th, 2009, the 10.6 upgrade is available for CAD9.95, otherwise the upgrade costs CAD35.00. (Prices are taken from the Apple Store online, Canadian site. Actually, another page says the "up-to-date" program costs CAD13.00, not CAD9.95... go figure.)
Note that Snow Leopard is NOT available for purchase online as a full license. I don't know if the Apple Store sells it as such, but I doubt it because:
1) 10.6 requires an Intel processor. 2) 10.6 is available as an upgrade to ANY MAC with an Intel processor. 3) ALL MACs with Intel processors were sold with a bundled license for whatever version of Mac OS was current at the time of manufacture.
...so why would it be available as anything other than an upgrade? (Note: This is the same logic Microsoft uses to justify only selling Windows 7 "upgrade" licenses to volume purchasers - the underlying assumption is that all your PCs came with OEM licenses.)
-Adam
On 2009-12-16, at 10:19 PM, Adam Thompson wrote:
I was at the Apple store yesterday, asking about Snow Leopard. I had understood earlier that it was an 'upgrade' from Leopard - but the guy in the store says it's a complete OS and has no previous requirements (except the firmware, I assume).
So there is also one being sold for $200?
Snow Leopard is available as an upgrade or as a bundled license with purchase of new hardware. To purchase it as an upgrade, you must be running Mac OS X on an Intel CPU, which implicitly limits the offer to owners of Mac OS X 10.4 or newer only. If you purchased a machine running 10.5 after June 8th, 2009, the 10.6 upgrade is available for CAD9.95, otherwise the upgrade costs CAD35.00. (Prices are taken from the Apple Store online, Canadian site. Actually, another page says the "up-to-date" program costs CAD13.00, not CAD9.95... go figure.)
BTW, if you want to take advantage of the cheap pricing of $10, you need to send in your paperwork within 90 days. Apple is NOT flexible on this. Lindsay (who sometimes attends meetings) waited 93 days and was turned down.
Note that Snow Leopard is NOT available for purchase online as a full license. I don't know if the Apple Store sells it as such, but I doubt it because:
- 10.6 requires an Intel processor.
- 10.6 is available as an upgrade to ANY MAC with an Intel processor.
- ALL MACs with Intel processors were sold with a bundled license for
whatever version of Mac OS was current at the time of manufacture.
I think you are correct. I only saw the $40 and $200 versions on the shelf.
...so why would it be available as anything other than an upgrade? (Note: This is the same logic Microsoft uses to justify only selling Windows 7 "upgrade" licenses to volume purchasers - the underlying assumption is that all your PCs came with OEM licenses.)
I think they just sell the major upgrades. The minor ones are free downloads via patches. I suspect the cheaper versions are because people are having sticker shock. After all $200 is a pretty big hit every 18 months or so.
-Adam
Later Mike
On 12/16/2009 10:02 PM, Dan Martin wrote:
I was at the Apple store yesterday, asking about Snow Leopard. I had understood earlier that it was an 'upgrade' from Leopard - but the guy in the store says it's a complete OS and has no previous requirements (except the firmware, I assume).
So there is also one being sold for $200?
http://store.apple.com/ca/product/MC209Z/A
It does also include iLife and iWork.
Peter
On 2009-12-16, at 10:20 PM, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
On 12/16/2009 10:02 PM, Dan Martin wrote:
I was at the Apple store yesterday, asking about Snow Leopard. I had understood earlier that it was an 'upgrade' from Leopard - but the guy in the store says it's a complete OS and has no previous requirements (except the firmware, I assume).
So there is also one being sold for $200?
http://store.apple.com/ca/product/MC209Z/A
It does also include iLife and iWork.
Peter
I wonder if it's the full versions... 10.4 had demo versions of some of the products. As demos I found them to be pretty useless. What's more I find demands for money for things I probably won't use to be quite offensive. There are a number of pretty good free products out there. Nowhere near the number of items as there is for Linux mind you but there are some good ones out there. I mean, why use M$ Word when there is NeoOffice... I've installed the Perian Codec package, Gimp (I think it wants a new version), Simply Burns, VLC, NeoOffice (naturally) and a couple of others. Anyhow... Since I don't use iLife and iWork (same as most people I think) there is no need to pay for it.
Later Mike
So there is also one being sold for $200?
http://store.apple.com/ca/product/MC209Z/A It does also include iLife and iWork.
I wonder if it's the full versions... 10.4 had demo versions of some of the products.
Yes, the $200 package includes the full versions of (AFAIK) iLife and iWork '09.
As demos I found them to be pretty useless.
As full versions, I found them to be pretty useless :-)
Well, that's not true. iPhoto is actually quite a well-done app, as long as you understand its scope: it's not *supposed* to replace PhotoShop or LightRoom.
What's more I find demands for money for things I probably won't use to be quite offensive.
Well, that's why you bought the $35 upgrade instead of the $200 package, right?
There are a number of pretty good free products out there. Nowhere near the number of items as there is for Linux mind you but there are some good ones out there. I mean, why use M$ Word when there is NeoOffice... I've installed the Perian Codec package, Gimp (I think it wants a new version), Simply Burns, VLC, NeoOffice (naturally) and a couple of others. Anyhow... Since I don't use iLife and iWork (same as most people I think) there is no need to pay for it.
I don't know many people who use iWork. I tried for most of a year, and disliked (most of) the products quite intensely. Pages is NOT a competitor to Microsoft Word, it's a competitor to Microsoft Publisher. I think Apple is flat-out lying when they call it a word processor. I don't know WHAT Numbers is supposed to be... some bizarre cross between Publisher and Excel, I suppose. Keynote, on the other hand, is actually a pretty decent product. It's not quite as powerful as PowerPoint, but it's infinitely easier to use (and prettier) for relatively simple presentations. I don't care if my spreadsheet is pretty or not, but I'll grant that it actually is a relevant concern for slide presentations.
Much like iWork, iLife also rests on the strength of one application: iPhoto. It's generally a category-leading application at any given point in time, although everyone else usually catches up pretty quickly. iMovie was good, then they crippled it, not sure why. (Maybe it was eating into FinalCut sales?) GarageBand, um... dunno. It sure didn't do anything for me. And iWeb - the less said, the better. I created one site in iWeb... again, it seems to be something that competes head-to-head with Microsoft Publisher, but this time there's no File->Print option :-).
-Adam
I use Apple GarageBand extensively, and it is *very* good. I think I'd call it "category leading", but it's a little tricky to define its category. It's a highlight of iLife for anyone who does audio editing, post-production sound mixing or computer music creation.
-Brian
On 2009-December-16, at 11:59 PM, Adam Thompson wrote:
So there is also one being sold for $200?
http://store.apple.com/ca/product/MC209Z/A It does also include iLife and iWork.
I wonder if it's the full versions... 10.4 had demo versions of some of the products.
Yes, the $200 package includes the full versions of (AFAIK) iLife and iWork '09.
As demos I found them to be pretty useless.
As full versions, I found them to be pretty useless :-)
Well, that's not true. iPhoto is actually quite a well-done app, as long as you understand its scope: it's not *supposed* to replace PhotoShop or LightRoom.
What's more I find demands for money for things I probably won't use to be quite offensive.
Well, that's why you bought the $35 upgrade instead of the $200 package, right?
There are a number of pretty good free products out there. Nowhere near the number of items as there is for Linux mind you but there are some good ones out there. I mean, why use M$ Word when there is NeoOffice... I've installed the Perian Codec package, Gimp (I think it wants a new version), Simply Burns, VLC, NeoOffice (naturally) and a couple of others. Anyhow... Since I don't use iLife and iWork (same as most people I think) there is no need to pay for it.
I don't know many people who use iWork. I tried for most of a year, and disliked (most of) the products quite intensely. Pages is NOT a competitor to Microsoft Word, it's a competitor to Microsoft Publisher. I think Apple is flat-out lying when they call it a word processor. I don't know WHAT Numbers is supposed to be... some bizarre cross between Publisher and Excel, I suppose. Keynote, on the other hand, is actually a pretty decent product. It's not quite as powerful as PowerPoint, but it's infinitely easier to use (and prettier) for relatively simple presentations. I don't care if my spreadsheet is pretty or not, but I'll grant that it actually is a relevant concern for slide presentations.
Much like iWork, iLife also rests on the strength of one application: iPhoto. It's generally a category-leading application at any given point in time, although everyone else usually catches up pretty quickly. iMovie was good, then they crippled it, not sure why. (Maybe it was eating into FinalCut sales?) GarageBand, um... dunno. It sure didn't do anything for me. And iWeb - the less said, the better. I created one site in iWeb... again, it seems to be something that competes head-to-head with Microsoft Publisher, but this time there's no File->Print option :-).
-Adam _______________________________________________ Roundtable mailing list Roundtable@muug.mb.ca http://www.muug.mb.ca/mailman/listinfo/roundtable
On 2009-12-17, at 5:16 PM, Brian Doob wrote:
I use Apple GarageBand extensively, and it is *very* good. I think I'd call it "category leading", but it's a little tricky to define its category. It's a highlight of iLife for anyone who does audio editing, post-production sound mixing or computer music creation.
10.4 seemed to have a full version. I haven't checked out 10.6. I thought it and iPhoto were separate from iLife.
At one point when I was younger, I was in the "not too bad" category of amateur musicians. I tried GarageBand myself for a few weeks. From what I saw I formed a generally favourable opinion of the program. Of course after all this time my skills as a musician are no longer there and GarageBand wouldn't be able to fix a disaster no matter how good a program it is. ;-)
-Brian
Later Mike
On 2009-December-16, at 11:59 PM, Adam Thompson wrote:
So there is also one being sold for $200?
http://store.apple.com/ca/product/MC209Z/A It does also include iLife and iWork.
I wonder if it's the full versions... 10.4 had demo versions of some of the products.
Yes, the $200 package includes the full versions of (AFAIK) iLife and iWork '09.
As demos I found them to be pretty useless.
As full versions, I found them to be pretty useless :-)
Well, that's not true. iPhoto is actually quite a well-done app, as long as you understand its scope: it's not *supposed* to replace PhotoShop or LightRoom.
What's more I find demands for money for things I probably won't use to be quite offensive.
Well, that's why you bought the $35 upgrade instead of the $200 package, right?
There are a number of pretty good free products out there. Nowhere near the number of items as there is for Linux mind you but there are some good ones out there. I mean, why use M$ Word when there is NeoOffice... I've installed the Perian Codec package, Gimp (I think it wants a new version), Simply Burns, VLC, NeoOffice (naturally) and a couple of others. Anyhow... Since I don't use iLife and iWork (same as most people I think) there is no need to pay for it.
I don't know many people who use iWork. I tried for most of a year, and disliked (most of) the products quite intensely. Pages is NOT a competitor to Microsoft Word, it's a competitor to Microsoft Publisher. I think Apple is flat-out lying when they call it a word processor. I don't know WHAT Numbers is supposed to be... some bizarre cross between Publisher and Excel, I suppose. Keynote, on the other hand, is actually a pretty decent product. It's not quite as powerful as PowerPoint, but it's infinitely easier to use (and prettier) for relatively simple presentations. I don't care if my spreadsheet is pretty or not, but I'll grant that it actually is a relevant concern for slide presentations.
Much like iWork, iLife also rests on the strength of one application: iPhoto. It's generally a category-leading application at any given point in time, although everyone else usually catches up pretty quickly. iMovie was good, then they crippled it, not sure why. (Maybe it was eating into FinalCut sales?) GarageBand, um... dunno. It sure didn't do anything for me. And iWeb - the less said, the better. I created one site in iWeb... again, it seems to be something that competes head-to-head with Microsoft Publisher, but this time there's no File->Print option :-).
-Adam _______________________________________________ Roundtable mailing list Roundtable@muug.mb.ca http://www.muug.mb.ca/mailman/listinfo/roundtable
On 12/17/2009 06:18 PM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
On 2009-12-17, at 5:16 PM, Brian Doob wrote:
10.4 seemed to have a full version. I haven't checked out 10.6.
Usually iLife is included for "free" only when you buy a new Mac. It doesn't come with the standard OS - so I have Mac OS X 10.6 and iLife from 2006 :)
Peter
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Brian Doob bdoob@acm.org wrote:
I use Apple GarageBand extensively, and it is *very* good. I think I'd call it "category leading", but it's a little tricky to define its category. It's a highlight of iLife for anyone who does audio editing, post-production sound mixing or computer music creation.
-Brian
Seconded. -Montana
On 2009-12-16, at 10:02 PM, Dan Martin wrote:
I was at the Apple store yesterday, asking about Snow Leopard. I had understood earlier that it was an 'upgrade' from Leopard - but the guy in the store says it's a complete OS and has no previous requirements (except the firmware, I assume).
As long as it is Intel then any version will work.
So there is also one being sold for $200?
Quick answer is yes. I gather the $200 version has more stuff to make up for what was apparently in 10.5 but not 10.4. Apart from that and the price I have no idea what the actual difference is. One person who replied later appears to have more info. Then again I'm looking at it from the perspective of being $160 I didn't have to spend.
-Dan
Later Mike
On 16-Dec-09, at 9:10 PM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
Since OS X sort of qualifies as *NIX here goes...
When upgrading an Intel Mac from 10.4 to 10.6 I was able to skip 10.5 by using the $40 (after tax) upgrade package instead of the $200 complete package Apple wants 10.4 users to buy. It's been running for three or four days now with no serious problems. I just had to manually download newer versions of a couple of third party programs.
They've finally implemented something like the pager. They call it Open Spaces. By default it gives the user four virtual screens.
Later Mike
Roundtable mailing list Roundtable@muug.mb.ca http://www.muug.mb.ca/mailman/listinfo/roundtable
Dan Martin GP Hospital Practitioner Computer Scientist ummar143@shaw.ca (204) 831-1746 answering machine always on
Subject: [RndTbl] OS X tips Since OS X sort of qualifies as *NIX here goes...
Not sort of: Mac OS X *is* UNIX.
In fact, Mac OS X has a significantly better historical claim to that name than any version of Linux that has ever existed. For those who aren't aware, Mac OS X consists of two pieces: the GUI, which is entirely proprietary to Apple, and the underlying UNIX operating system, called Darwin.
Darwin is the direct descendant of OpenStep (jointly developed by NeXT and Sun), which is in turn the descendant of NextStep (developed by NeXT) which was the combination of a CMU Mach micro-kernel, a complete implementation of BSD UNIX on top of that, and the NextStep GUI on top of both. (Yes, Display PostScript was also an important part of the system architecture, if you want to be *really* pedantic.)
Darwin apparently now also includes substantial amounts of code from the FreeBSD project, which can also trace its ancestry directly back to the original BSD UNIX operating system.
The name "UNIX" is specifically and legally reserved for operating systems which pass the Single Unix Specification qualification tests, as administered by the Open Group (and previously administered by OSF and X/Open, at times), and whose vendors have also entered into a licensing agreement with the Open Group to permit their use of the term UNIX(tm). Note that POSIX-compliance by itself does NOT entitle an operating system to call itself UNIX.
The Linux kernel is NOT UNIX. It is *impossible* for the Linux kernel itself to be called UNIX, because the UNIX requirements include vast amounts of "user-land" software in addition to the kernel. This means that each distribution would have to independently undergo certification to qualify for the UNIX trademark.
At least one Linux distribution ("LINUX-FT") has been certified as POSIX.1-compliant, but not as UNIX(tm). [http://www.ukuug.org/newsletter/linux-newsletter/linux@uk21/posix.shtml] The vendor in question (Lasermoon) appears to be defunct, and the Linux-FT development appears to have been taken over by Caldera (back when they were pro-Linux). Linux-FT, however, derived from a german distribution called "Unifix Linux System". Their website still exists (www.unifix.de) but hasn't been updated since 2001. The Unifix product page for v2.0 (http://www.unifix.de/products/unifix_2_0/index.html) claims that their system is POSIX-certified... but it also proudly claims that it's based on the 2.0 kernel. I can't find any indication that the company is still active.
Other currently-available operating systems that *are* "UNIX" include Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, z/OS, and UnixWare (if SCO still answers their phones!). UNIXes that are no longer available (AFAIK) include SGI IRIX, NEC UX/4800, NCR (TeraData) UNIX, SCO OpenServer, NEC FT-UX, and Stratus FTX. The official list can be found at http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/.
Operating systems derived from BSD UNIX also have some legal basis to be called "UNIX"; Apple's Mac OS X is in fact the only operating system that has both the ancestral BSD claim *and* Open Group certification. Sun Solaris, IBM AIX, HP HP-UX, whatever NEC/TeraData ships now and SCO UnixWare also have (at various versions) dual claims, but deriving from AT&T UNIX licenses, not BSD.
So in terms of currently shipping product, the most UNIXy of UNIXes are: MacOS X, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX and UnixWare. Linux doesn't even make it to the qualifying heats.
When upgrading an Intel Mac from 10.4 to 10.6 I was able to
[...]
They've finally implemented something like the pager. They call it Open Spaces. By default it gives the user four virtual screens.
Spaces, which closely mimics the "pager"-style behaviour that's been around under UNIX since at least early versions of NCDwm (ca. 1991), has been included since Mac OS X 10.5. Exposé, which is a somewhat different feature that many people used to obtain the same sort of productivity boost, has been included since Mac OS X 10.3.
FYI, the multiple-desktop feature has also been available under Microsoft Windows to anyone running a Matrox video card (since about 1996) or ATI video card (since about 1998, IIRC).
-Adam "Pedantic" Thompson athompso@athompso.net
On 12/16/2009 10:09 PM, Adam Thompson wrote:
Subject: [RndTbl] OS X tips Since OS X sort of qualifies as *NIX here goes...
Not sort of: Mac OS X *is* UNIX.
Mac OS X 10.5 and 10.6 on intel are UNIX03, earlier versions are not, Apple also never bothered qualifying the ppc version of 10.5 (who can blame them?).
Peter
-
Adam Thompson -
Brian Doob -
Dan Martin -
Gilles Detillieux -
Mike Pfaiffer -
Montana Quiring -
Peter O'Gorman