Any success running MacOS in bhyve?

[getopt]

The enemy of my enemy is my friend?
Way back in the early 2000's Apple was kind of the good guy.

Not exactly my perception. I abandoned Apple ever since retiring my Apple IIe for an IBM PS/2 mod 60. That made me the owner of an IBM Model M keyboard I still love to hack on.

Why I Still Use a 34-Year-Old IBM Model M Keyboard

In the 1980s, IBM created the world's greatest keyboard: the Model M! Here's why I still use my 34 year-old unit every day.

www.howtogeek.com

While Apple Inc started 1984 marketing its design of products (Macintosh) for reasoning inflated consumer prices of their products, the main reason for not buying Apple was the lack of compatibility with the rest of the IT hardware world.

The worm in Apple is the "genetic defect" of wanted incompatibility. It's their "DNA" and that never will get a repair.

 

[ZioMario]

That's a very old cpu. qemu can emulate but that will be very slow.

who cares about qemu on freebsd if it is not accelerated with kvm ? it's useless. Instead,what about haxm ? if qemu can be accelerated with haxm this will be interesting.

 

[kpedersen]

who cares about qemu on freebsd if it is not accelerated with kvm ? it's useless.

Typical qemu, yes (unless you like retro DOS games

However qemu-static on FreeBSD is fairly good. It only emulates userland; leaving the expensive parts (kernel, X11) to the native host. This means that speeds are actually very reasonable. An aarch jail using qemu-static is quite competitive to using a Raspberry Pi 4.

 

[ZioMario]

I'm reading here :​

Add Support for FreeBSD? · Issue #106 · intel/haxm

github.com

the comment of JayFoxRox is interesting for me when he says :

As a host: Last I checked, FreeBSD had a KVM kernel module. Even if that was removed again, it's probably easier to fix it up, rather than working on HAXM (which uses a very similar interface, but has less features at the time of writing). With competition by WHPX and HVF I assume that HAXM will eventually fade into obscurity unless it can find its niche, or the 2 first-party APIs suddenly stop being worked on. HAXMs major benefit over those APIs is that it's open-source and supports older versions of host OS. However, the same is true for KVM, which also happens to be a more mature project (with very active development, as there's no competition on Linux).

So,if it is not so much complicated to fix KVM,why no one is interested to do this ? Adding KVM to qemu will be a very added value to FreeBSD. The guys at Dragonfly-BSD acceelerate qemu with NVMM. Anyway Bhyve is still not so good such as qemu+kvm.

 

[ZioMario]

I don't know.

 

[bendany]

Hi all

I have some good news!
I’ve successfully got macOS 26.7 running on bhyve under FreeBSD 14.5.
It required quite a lot of patching, but it’s finally working. I’ll release the complete keelOS project soon.

 

[ZioMario]

Hi all

I have some good news!
I’ve successfully got macOS 26.7 running on bhyve under FreeBSD 14.5.
It required quite a lot of patching, but it’s finally working. I’ll release the complete keelOS project soon.

I wanted do the same as you but using qemu accelerated with bhyve (on FreeBSD 16.0 at the moment), but I have resigned this project because I don't like closed source OS. I don't use MacOS or Windows. Anyway,good job. What's keelOS ? Why did you use FreeBSD 14.5 and not 15.0 ?

 

[bendany]

I wanted do the same as you but using qemu accelerated with bhyve (on FreeBSD 16.0 at the moment), but I have resigned this project because I don't like closed source OS. I don't use MacOS or Windows. Anyway,good job. What's keelOS ? Why did you use FreeBSD 14.5 and not 15.0 ?

I've been running FreeBSD 14.x as a hypervisor for years without a single unplanned reboot, so 14.5-RELEASE felt like a safe base. The bhyve fixes that landed after 14.5 are backported into our tree, and we plan to move to 15.x once things settle. keelOS is a bhyve-based virtualization OS with a web UI, see https://keelos.dev for more.