It should be LFS version for Mac! I dont want install bootcamp Windows only for Live for Speed 
Live for speed for Apple Mac OS
#2
- cargame.nl
#3
- ATiRAGEPRO
Mac gamer
http://www.lfs.net/?page=faq&search=linux&id=48
I think you might be underestimating the magnitude of your suggestion. Porting a PC game to Mac OS is no easy task. Sure, Mac OS may be easy to code for, (using X-code and Universal Binary,) but making a Mac OS port of the game would result in the developers having to re-code all of the 3D elements of the game just to be compatible with OpenAL. (OpenGL for us Linux and Windows users.) Even if they did make a Mac port of the game, that would mean that coming up with a new release would be twice as much work, because updates to the core elements of the game (such as physics, graphics, ect.) would have to be released for two different operating systems at the same time.
X-coders are hard to come by, and even though apple kindly offers all of their training and software for free on their website, (http://developer.apple.com/technologies/mac/) you can't expect anyone to learn this stuff overnight. It would be a lot easier if this game were already an OpenGL compatible game, but because we're talking about a DirectX game, I don't see the THREE DEVELOPERS OF THE GAME re-writing their whole source code just to be compatible with a linux/unix based OS.
I would like to see a Mac version myself. The only reason I have a PC is as a result of all the good games being only for windows. I honestly don't think it's going to happen at all, but that's just my opinion.
I think you might be underestimating the magnitude of your suggestion. Porting a PC game to Mac OS is no easy task. Sure, Mac OS may be easy to code for, (using X-code and Universal Binary,) but making a Mac OS port of the game would result in the developers having to re-code all of the 3D elements of the game just to be compatible with OpenAL. (OpenGL for us Linux and Windows users.) Even if they did make a Mac port of the game, that would mean that coming up with a new release would be twice as much work, because updates to the core elements of the game (such as physics, graphics, ect.) would have to be released for two different operating systems at the same time.
X-coders are hard to come by, and even though apple kindly offers all of their training and software for free on their website, (http://developer.apple.com/technologies/mac/) you can't expect anyone to learn this stuff overnight. It would be a lot easier if this game were already an OpenGL compatible game, but because we're talking about a DirectX game, I don't see the THREE DEVELOPERS OF THE GAME re-writing their whole source code just to be compatible with a linux/unix based OS.
I would like to see a Mac version myself. The only reason I have a PC is as a result of all the good games being only for windows. I honestly don't think it's going to happen at all, but that's just my opinion.
It's worth it, better framerates, not having to worry about converting everything on wine (I'd suppose).
In b4 the other Dustin
yep same for me when i get my new mac ... just imagine how many more LFSers they would have if they sis a cross system game
MacOS is not a gaming platform and definitely won't be for a while. I agree with ATIRAGE that rewriting the whole game to make it using technologies available on Macs is a heroic task. It's not just the graphics engine, it's virtually everything. Moreover, Macs are still lacking in terms of gaming hardware support. I wonder how many people would actually play LFS on Mac when there will most likely be issues with wheels, shifters etc. Recent port of the Source engine to Macs also revealed some performance problems with MacOS's 3D graphics stack.
If there is enough will on the developers part, we might eventually get some better support for games on various platforms, but it's gonna take time. Steam coming to Mac and (hopefully) Linux can pave the way. If it's successful, games designed with portability in mind might appear, but thinking that the devs will turn away from DirectX/Win API is rather juvenile. It's not even sure if users of alternative platform will be interested in games at all.
BTW, I recall Scawen implementing an alternative shadow drawing method to LFS in order to increase compatibility with WINE. Even though there is no need for this workaround now, I consider this to be quite accommodating towards *NIX users. Imagine EA doing the same thing...
If there is enough will on the developers part, we might eventually get some better support for games on various platforms, but it's gonna take time. Steam coming to Mac and (hopefully) Linux can pave the way. If it's successful, games designed with portability in mind might appear, but thinking that the devs will turn away from DirectX/Win API is rather juvenile. It's not even sure if users of alternative platform will be interested in games at all.
BTW, I recall Scawen implementing an alternative shadow drawing method to LFS in order to increase compatibility with WINE. Even though there is no need for this workaround now, I consider this to be quite accommodating towards *NIX users. Imagine EA doing the same thing...
Wanna know the biggest issue with porting LFS to OSX?
It's not the fact that if it was ported that it is a lot of work.
It's hardware support. Logitech along with every other dev has provided 0 hardware support for G25 or other wheels in OSX. You'd be stuck with a G25 in combined pedal mode at 270°.. Not a brilliant setup...
Honestly, as much as I am a mac user... It's best for LFS (due to it depending on certain hardware that is, very much Windows only) to play it in Windows.
It's not the fact that if it was ported that it is a lot of work.
It's hardware support. Logitech along with every other dev has provided 0 hardware support for G25 or other wheels in OSX. You'd be stuck with a G25 in combined pedal mode at 270°.. Not a brilliant setup...
Honestly, as much as I am a mac user... It's best for LFS (due to it depending on certain hardware that is, very much Windows only) to play it in Windows.
#8
- ATiRAGEPRO
Setback
Yes it is.
90% of wheels are HID compliant, therefore, 90% of wheels work in OS X. Some of those wheels use specialized force feedback output that Apple's Input sprockets can't read. (this includes the Logitech G25.) you can check your wheel's compatibility using this:
http://support.feralinteractiv ... ?x=&mod_id=2&id=9
You forgot about the fact that the 6-speed h-gate shifting and the clutch pedal don't work either.
Luckily for most of us, the G25 isn't the only racing wheel in the entire universe, and there are countless others that have been developed over the years that work just fine on a mac, not to mention, just about all game pads with analog sticks are also mac compatible and are fully functional. (The exceptions being game pads that use the MIDI audio ports, and those that aren't 100%HID compliant.) My Logitech MOMO force feedback wheel works just fine on my Mac.What you said doesn't make much sense. Even if that were true, (which it isn't,) that would not even be a remotely legitimate reason to not port a game to another platform. Controllers of every kind, whether they be steering wheels or joypads, share a very BASIC set of instructions that they send to the computer or console they are plugged into. even Xbox360 and PS3 controllers can work on a mac these days. Fore those controllers that Apple's Input Sprockets can't recognize, there is software available to get around that.
http://www.carvware.com/gamepadcompanion.html
Like I said earlier, even if all controllers only worked on a Windows platform, that wouldn't be a very compelling reason not to make a game for some other OS. It would be a pretty small setback.
No. In a racing simulator.. controller is everything. Yes the Momo racing works.. but that's a very small set of wheels. G25 is basically the bare minimum for race sims I'd say.
You fail to grasp. Yes Apple has a generic HID driver.. that recognizes HID devices. However, Logitech doesn't use HID. It uses HID to be able to provide a limited driverless feature set. But after that it relies on proprietory USB commands to let the G25 support different things. This is something Logitech would haffto implement in their software but they don't seem too inclined to develop software for an OS that nobody would use it in.
Along with why would I want to downgrade and not use my gorgeous G25.. and instead use my Momo that sits in my closet? That's retarded. Hardware support is a massive concern.
It's just not an efficient use of time. I'm sure all of us (myself included) would prefer better tyre physics than OSX support. I'm a ****ing Mac user and I say it's a waste of time.
Dual booting is much easier and not a waste of time for the Developers. There's (by a survey of who has mentioned it) about 10 Mac users on the forums.
I'd reckon it would take Scawen atleast a month to port LFS (that's a huge low-ball) to Mac OS.. plus the 2000$ computer he'd need to buy to develop for OSX.. plus rewriting the GFX engine in OpenGL.. and the Input would need to be ported to use a platform independent input method.. and take the sound away from being D3D to use core audio...
It's more work than it's worth for a few users. He might make 100$ in licences, for the tonnes of losses in sales from unsatisfied customers going "Where is the Scirocco? Where is Rockingham? S3??!".
Dual booting your Mac is a much better option. or Wine. LFS being ported is just a waste of effort, and I still wouldn't play it in OSX. Logitech doesn't put the effort in to make the G25 supported well (or most of their other wheels). So you have no decent input method. Scawen won't put the effort in because it's a waste of time. It's ultimately a stupid issue that has been talked to death in these forums. It won't happen. It's a waste of time to even dwell on it.
I don't care about it being ported. I'm fine using Windows for gaming.
You fail to grasp. Yes Apple has a generic HID driver.. that recognizes HID devices. However, Logitech doesn't use HID. It uses HID to be able to provide a limited driverless feature set. But after that it relies on proprietory USB commands to let the G25 support different things. This is something Logitech would haffto implement in their software but they don't seem too inclined to develop software for an OS that nobody would use it in.
Along with why would I want to downgrade and not use my gorgeous G25.. and instead use my Momo that sits in my closet? That's retarded. Hardware support is a massive concern.
It's just not an efficient use of time. I'm sure all of us (myself included) would prefer better tyre physics than OSX support. I'm a ****ing Mac user and I say it's a waste of time.
Dual booting is much easier and not a waste of time for the Developers. There's (by a survey of who has mentioned it) about 10 Mac users on the forums.
I'd reckon it would take Scawen atleast a month to port LFS (that's a huge low-ball) to Mac OS.. plus the 2000$ computer he'd need to buy to develop for OSX.. plus rewriting the GFX engine in OpenGL.. and the Input would need to be ported to use a platform independent input method.. and take the sound away from being D3D to use core audio...
It's more work than it's worth for a few users. He might make 100$ in licences, for the tonnes of losses in sales from unsatisfied customers going "Where is the Scirocco? Where is Rockingham? S3??!".
Dual booting your Mac is a much better option. or Wine. LFS being ported is just a waste of effort, and I still wouldn't play it in OSX. Logitech doesn't put the effort in to make the G25 supported well (or most of their other wheels). So you have no decent input method. Scawen won't put the effort in because it's a waste of time. It's ultimately a stupid issue that has been talked to death in these forums. It won't happen. It's a waste of time to even dwell on it.
I don't care about it being ported. I'm fine using Windows for gaming.
A man can dream.
I agree. Converting Graphical elements to OpenGL alone is way more trouble than it's worth, let alone building the LFS.exe all over again. As much as I like the idea, it really doesn't seem like a profitable or practical Idea right now. LFS isn't even finished being made yet. Maybe a while AFTER the S3 update is released. MAYBE.
I see your point, but I still stick by what I said. The act of rebuilding LFS for a Mac version is a far bigger issue than 'I can't use my $300 racing wheel on a Mac.' Drivers (or "Kext" files for Mac hardware) are remarkably easy to make for something like a controller. Logitech has made Mac drivers for a lot of their other hardware, so either Logitech is being tremendously LAZY, or, just didn't see the point of making drivers for an OS that only has about 4 racing sims available for it. Hell, if I had the G25, I could probably make the damn Kext file myself.
Re-writing the graphics engine of LFS on the other hand, is a pain in the @$$, therefore, it's a far bigger problem.
I see your point, but I still stick by what I said. The act of rebuilding LFS for a Mac version is a far bigger issue than 'I can't use my $300 racing wheel on a Mac.' Drivers (or "Kext" files for Mac hardware) are remarkably easy to make for something like a controller. Logitech has made Mac drivers for a lot of their other hardware, so either Logitech is being tremendously LAZY, or, just didn't see the point of making drivers for an OS that only has about 4 racing sims available for it.
Hell, if I had the G25, I could probably make the damn Kext file myself. Re-writing the graphics engine of LFS on the other hand, is a pain in the @$$, therefore, it's a far bigger problem... Uh, you fail to grasp that a kext isn't "remarkably easy" to make, the average programmer can't just wake up and go "yeah, I'll write one of those today!"
It's a kernel-mode bit of code. It has to be FLAWLESS. An average joe can't just write a kext... You haffto write it in C, and it is as low level as C code comes. Not to mention it can't have any leaks or crashes or as you barrel down into T1... "oops.. brakes don't work!".
A 10 year programmer in C would probably have a bit of a challenge with a kext (or any driver for that matter).
I honestly doubt that LFS will get ported to OpenGL as well, even after S3 because what benefit is there? It's not a fast-track to get it to Mac or Linux, as the rest of the game needs to be ported to their various API's. Not to mention that Scawen seems to be very fluent in DirectX which is likely why LFS is built to target DirectX.
It's a kernel-mode bit of code. It has to be FLAWLESS. An average joe can't just write a kext... You haffto write it in C, and it is as low level as C code comes. Not to mention it can't have any leaks or crashes or as you barrel down into T1... "oops.. brakes don't work!".
A 10 year programmer in C would probably have a bit of a challenge with a kext (or any driver for that matter).
I honestly doubt that LFS will get ported to OpenGL as well, even after S3 because what benefit is there? It's not a fast-track to get it to Mac or Linux, as the rest of the game needs to be ported to their various API's. Not to mention that Scawen seems to be very fluent in DirectX which is likely why LFS is built to target DirectX.
Direct (Generation) X
I probably should have clarified this earlier, but I intended to edit the LogitechHIDDevices-ISO file to add a few strings if I ever bought a g25/g27, not just build a driver from scratch.
I said "for something like a controller" for a reason. A controller/game-pad with buttons and analog sticks is kind of easier, with far smaller coding involved compared to other kinds of hardware. I'm not talking about some Realtek ACL888 sound board or an ethernet card, which is a completely different matter. Lets not forget that we are talking about a company (Logitech) that has done this before.
(see /System/Library/Extensions/LogitechHIDDevices.kext) You said yourself that the g25 "uses HID to be able to provide a limited driver-less feature set." There is no reason they couldn't add an extra instruction set to the Contents/MacOS/LogitechHIDDevices-ISO src in the kext. This is why I said that either Logitech didn't see the point if there were so few games for it, or they were just being really lazy.:gnasher: The same arguments made for this game not ever being ported to Mac are the same reasons I don't use linux anymore. It's either to much work to maintain or there isn't enough hardware that supports it. (That, and the fact that every Linux distro I have ever used is glitchy as all hell.
) If there were more racing sims on Mac, there would be more hardware support. If there were more hardware support, there would be more racing sims. It's no different than saying "If there were more hardware support on Linux, there would be more Linux users." The cycle will probably continue forever, but it is nice to entertain the Idea that there would be at least one decent game on a MacOS. Just sayin'.Editing a few strings in the PList won't add support for the G25/G27. Yes it'll (maybe) let the LogitechHIDDevice take control of it, rather than the generic HID in OS X, but the driver still won't know what to do with the G25.. and will likely simply fail to load.
I don't think you understand the complexity of a driver, it's not something that "hacking a plist" can fix. It would need to be entirely rewritten, for the G25 a control panel would be written as well, to send commands to the device to set rotation, combined/seperate pedals and such.
Yes, Logitech could write a kext for the G25, but they won't. The LogitechHIDDevices.kext - which I don't even have in my OSX install.. only LogitechForceFeedback.kext.. which is written by Apple anyways - isn't something that could be hacked. It's not a matter of going in and saying "use G25" in the code. They need to effectively code the driver from scratch. Not to mention a random forum for another WINDOWS racing simulator isn't the place that will get any notice from Logitech.
And it's not the same for Linux either. The issue with Linux is most people using it aren't using it because they are forced to.. they are using it due to ideological (or stability) concerns.
Linux won't gain adoption becuase due to these ideological views of "go free software", binary drivers for GFX and other hardware is discouraged. Thus the average joe that installs Linux, won't have 3D support... It's something that every OS seems to take for granted. I install Windows 7, and I have basic 3D support.. I connect to internet, and it takes hold and installs proper drivers for me. Voila, I have full 3D support. OSX, it just works.
Nobody sees a market in Mac. Valve just tried the waters recently by porting Source games over, and has been met with a larger base than expected, but that's a variety of popular FPS games, Counterstrike, Half-Life 2, Team Fortress 2, and Day Of Defeat. CS alone has millions of people playing on any given day. LFS maybe has 10,000 people playing, so a port reaches say.. 30 people? Not a good return on months that Scawen may spend on it.
It's a futile topic to converse. Don't get me wrong, I'd be the first person to go "Yay Mac!" in a thread, but Scawen has waaay more things we'd all rather him work on than effectively rewriting the 3d Engine , Input handling and Sound engine of LFS.
I don't think you understand the complexity of a driver, it's not something that "hacking a plist" can fix. It would need to be entirely rewritten, for the G25 a control panel would be written as well, to send commands to the device to set rotation, combined/seperate pedals and such.
Yes, Logitech could write a kext for the G25, but they won't. The LogitechHIDDevices.kext - which I don't even have in my OSX install.. only LogitechForceFeedback.kext.. which is written by Apple anyways - isn't something that could be hacked. It's not a matter of going in and saying "use G25" in the code. They need to effectively code the driver from scratch. Not to mention a random forum for another WINDOWS racing simulator isn't the place that will get any notice from Logitech.
And it's not the same for Linux either. The issue with Linux is most people using it aren't using it because they are forced to.. they are using it due to ideological (or stability) concerns.
Linux won't gain adoption becuase due to these ideological views of "go free software", binary drivers for GFX and other hardware is discouraged. Thus the average joe that installs Linux, won't have 3D support... It's something that every OS seems to take for granted. I install Windows 7, and I have basic 3D support.. I connect to internet, and it takes hold and installs proper drivers for me. Voila, I have full 3D support. OSX, it just works.
Nobody sees a market in Mac. Valve just tried the waters recently by porting Source games over, and has been met with a larger base than expected, but that's a variety of popular FPS games, Counterstrike, Half-Life 2, Team Fortress 2, and Day Of Defeat. CS alone has millions of people playing on any given day. LFS maybe has 10,000 people playing, so a port reaches say.. 30 people? Not a good return on months that Scawen may spend on it.
It's a futile topic to converse. Don't get me wrong, I'd be the first person to go "Yay Mac!" in a thread, but Scawen has waaay more things we'd all rather him work on than effectively rewriting the 3d Engine , Input handling and Sound engine of LFS.
Who said anything about a .plist file?
I was talking about decompiling contents/macOS/LogitechHIDDevices. Editing some plist file is certainly not going to do anything particularly useful.I hadn't even thought about the control panel.
Most hardware developers don't even bother supporting Linux, either because it isn't mainstream or because it isn't profitable. Most software developers don't make software for Linux, either because their is little hardware support, it isn't mainstream, or because it isn't profitable. The Mac OS is in pretty much the same situation when it comes to game development.
Anyway, Apple dropped the ball YEARS ago when it comes to gaming. Not because the platform wasn't popular, but because finding info on Mac OS and Power PC app development was like trying to find a needle in a 12 foot haystack trough a hubble telescope in outer space.:gnasher: I remember trying learn since I was about 10 years old, and by the time I did learn to do it right, Apple announced they were switching to INTEL cores the same month.
Third party development before the whole Intel switch was kind of scarce. You would NEVER have seen a version of Half-Life 2 or Counter-strike on a PowerPC computer. ... Xbox 360 doesn't count.
Now that the Mac already has this bad reputation since the 90s when it comes to gaming, it's no wonder there are so few Mac game developers.
Decompiling it... I doubt that'd help as you'd need to know Assembly.. good luck figuring that out!
... How is Mac OS suffer from those 3 problems?
Hardware support is excellent. There's no Mac in the last 5 years that suffers from exceptionally weak hardware (GMA Macbooks are about the only ones). There's no drivers to worry about for.. basically any of the built in hardware. Even most external devices just work (G25 is a specialty gaming device.. using that as an example is wrong/a poor example).
Mac OS is definitely mainstream. More and more people are buying Mac's over PC's. They're not niche like Linux is.
Developing for OSX is profitable.. just ask Valve... They do make a more mainstream game than LFS is (hence why LFS isn't profitable to be ported to OSX).. but they've noted publically that the amount of Mac users is staggering compared to what they expected when developing it.
Apple didn't drop the ball at all.. They were busy transitioning, which gave developers not a clear target. They were transitioning from the old, Carbon API, to Cocoa as the preferred target. Mind you PPC app development VS Intel development in OSX is the same. Sure you might haffto make a few tweaks, but gcc/g++ takes care of all the hard bits in the compilation process... it's just a matter of changing your compilation target.
Honestly.. if Apple stuck to PPC.. and IBM made some decent processors, who knows? Maybe Valve would have seen that Apple was still a viable platform and took the time to do it anyways? The major speedbump was the OpenGL vs DirectX... and they crossed that. We would never know.
Xbox certainly doesn't count, especially as the PS3 is a PowerPC architecture as well.
There isn't a lack of Mac game developers either.. less mainstream games, but heck.. Starcraft 2 is Mac, Civ5 will be OSX. There are smaller game devs as well.
... How is Mac OS suffer from those 3 problems?
Hardware support is excellent. There's no Mac in the last 5 years that suffers from exceptionally weak hardware (GMA Macbooks are about the only ones). There's no drivers to worry about for.. basically any of the built in hardware. Even most external devices just work (G25 is a specialty gaming device.. using that as an example is wrong/a poor example).
Mac OS is definitely mainstream. More and more people are buying Mac's over PC's. They're not niche like Linux is.
Developing for OSX is profitable.. just ask Valve... They do make a more mainstream game than LFS is (hence why LFS isn't profitable to be ported to OSX).. but they've noted publically that the amount of Mac users is staggering compared to what they expected when developing it.
Apple didn't drop the ball at all.. They were busy transitioning, which gave developers not a clear target. They were transitioning from the old, Carbon API, to Cocoa as the preferred target. Mind you PPC app development VS Intel development in OSX is the same. Sure you might haffto make a few tweaks, but gcc/g++ takes care of all the hard bits in the compilation process... it's just a matter of changing your compilation target.
Honestly.. if Apple stuck to PPC.. and IBM made some decent processors, who knows? Maybe Valve would have seen that Apple was still a viable platform and took the time to do it anyways? The major speedbump was the OpenGL vs DirectX... and they crossed that. We would never know.
Xbox certainly doesn't count, especially as the PS3 is a PowerPC architecture as well.
There isn't a lack of Mac game developers either.. less mainstream games, but heck.. Starcraft 2 is Mac, Civ5 will be OSX. There are smaller game devs as well.
ATiRAGEPRO, OpenAL is audio library, OpenGL is graphics library, and both of them are available for Windows, Linux and Mac OS X.Yeah. xD I have no Idea what I was snorting when I said that.:tired: I had also mentioned something about "Input sprockets."
That is some really old $#!t. Mac Os used "Input Sprockets" back in 1999, back in the days of Mac OS 8.6. I I need to get some sleep.:doh:Why is there a link to a US flag?
Sigh. I knew once Valve had ported the source engine to MacOS that this would happen. For Mac fans here are some facts.
1) Valve have deep pockets and lots of devs and big customer base.
2) Source engine comes from and is influenced by iD engines which supported OGL etc from the out set.
3) The Valve games running native on Macs in OGL still only get 1/2 framerate of Windows!
4) Apple and hardward makers never bothered to optimize for games as there were no games.
5) I doubt LFS was designed for anything apart from DirectX
6) There is only 1 developer to do the port.
7) Macs are less than 10% of PC market how many would buy LFS?
8) The port is a LOT of work.
Just get over it and dual boot!
1) Valve have deep pockets and lots of devs and big customer base.
2) Source engine comes from and is influenced by iD engines which supported OGL etc from the out set.
3) The Valve games running native on Macs in OGL still only get 1/2 framerate of Windows!
4) Apple and hardward makers never bothered to optimize for games as there were no games.
5) I doubt LFS was designed for anything apart from DirectX
6) There is only 1 developer to do the port.
7) Macs are less than 10% of PC market how many would buy LFS?
8) The port is a LOT of work.
Just get over it and dual boot!
I guess he copied and pasted your name together with the flag from your user information on the left.
Why he didn't just quote your post, I have no idea.
I don't usually post on these marketing topics telling the devs what to do, but here goes.
There is a big opinion saying that improving the game itself would be much better than porting it to something else with all the people being nice and thinking about how Scawen would get more money.
What everyone seems to somehow forget is that porting to mac is very likely to get more buyers than some new physics.
There is a big opinion saying that improving the game itself would be much better than porting it to something else with all the people being nice and thinking about how Scawen would get more money.
What everyone seems to somehow forget is that porting to mac is very likely to get more buyers than some new physics.
However.. if Scawen were to port LFS to Mac.. vs new Physics.. which would make his existing fanbase likely to recommend LFS still? Probably the new physics. Yeah a port to Mac might see more purchases.. but for time in/money in.. it's probably not worth it.
Nevermind the fact that I've given some perfect reasons why LFS wouldn't work on Mac (I am not giving up my ****ing G25 to use a Momo).
Are you sure?
I have no idea how many Mac users there are and I have no idea how many of them are potential LFS customers but I don't think it would be that many.
However, with the new physics coming with a big patch, there will certainly be some articles on some bigger sim-racing sites turning the attention from other sim-racing fans (back) towards LFS. Add to that simply word of mouth as Dustin said and I'd say the number of potential buyers is higher there.
You know there's also a big issue, when the most vocal Mac enthusiast on this forum is screaming that LFS to Mac is a bad idea/waste of effort.
You're just starting to get bored of trolling. 
Hah.. I'll troll until my last breath squeezes from my lungs
1
2
Live for speed for Apple Mac OS
(49 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG