I imagine they will receive a cease and desist?
Did they reverse engineer something?
Did they reverse engineer something?
Additionally Apple intentionally designed the M1 architecture to support additional OSes. They have even made changes to their code that have fixed issues the Asahi project was having. So while there's no official support this project is certainly known to Apple and has raised no concerns so far.
Didn't you just say no proprietary code is used?
I'm confused.
[...] they *also* added a raw image mode that will never break again and doesn't require Mach-Os. And people said they wouldn't help. This is intended for us.
HN discussion about this tweet: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29591578
How can you say that? Where is the documentation for M1 that can be used to implement support for other OSes?
If you're looking for specific hardware documentation it doesn't really exist per se but the xnu kernel is open source, so if you want to look a lot of the basic architecture is out there I'm pretty sure.
That said, afaik asahi is avoiding looking at the xnu source and is mostly using their own m1n1 bootloader/hypervisor to run macos under and monitor hardware interaction and deriving their drivers from that.
(m1n1 is honestly some incredible work and I actually used it to get a non-Linux, non-macos os to boot to serial console a few weeks ago, it was fun)
Some people make a big deal out of reverse-engineering blobs through disassembly particularly for certain discrete components (e.g DSP or GPUs) but a) writing a set of clean-room specifications not containing any copyrighted information to use as a reference is a known task and often considered legal and b) m1n1 makes it in some cases easier to understand how the hardware is being used versus manual disassembly of blobs or drivers.