If this software could be developed and installed, cross-compiling a native Unix toolchain, either from the open source code distributed by Apple, or the BSDs, or even GNU, should be just as easy to pull off.
So what gives?
If this software could be developed and installed, cross-compiling a native Unix toolchain, either from the open source code distributed by Apple, or the BSDs, or even GNU, should be just as easy to pull off.
So what gives?
That’s fine for most GUI-driven applications, but it’s kind of problematic for a traditional *nix-style shell. If you were Apple, or you had a jailbroken device and could circumvent the sandbox, you wouldn’t have any problems running a normal shell and command line utilities.
It makes owning such a device even more baffling, sounds incredibly useless to me. I didn't know iOS was such a trash fire.
Can you run bash on your dishwasher?
But yes-- I certainly do expect to be able to run a shell on any computer that I own. It's nice to hear that iOS devices are just another appliance for the affluent majority.
Which Apple has cleverly made sure are not under the control of your process. There really is no way to reliably spawn another process and get it to communicate back to your application.
> If you were Apple, or you had a jailbroken device and could circumvent the sandbox, you wouldn’t have any problems running a normal shell and command line utilities.
Apple does in fact have the ability to spawn a shell on internal devices.
Fun fact: the kernel has continuously been dropping features that are seen as “unnecessary” on iOS. For example, I recently heard that iOS no longer supports setuid at all; the entire feature has been ripped out of the kernel because it’s not used.