Make your STDERR red(github.com)

https://github.com/sickill/stderred

23 comments

raldi15 anni fa

Why override write() when you can just use pipes?

http://distfiles.exherbo.org/distfiles/hilite-1.5.c

One problem is stdio buffering. By default the C stdio functions will flush buffers after every line for file descriptors that are connected to terminals, but only every now and then for file descriptors connected to disk files or pipes. So if a program outputs messages on both stdout and stderr (like a compiler), then after filtering one of the streams through a pipe, the messages are not interleaved properly.

colmmacc15 anni fa

One way is to wrap the program with a parent process that can handle the colourising. Here's a version I've been using for 6 years or so;

http://people.apache.org/~colm/utils/sexec.c

it uses regular select semantics and a trivial state machine to pick the active fd, and has an XML mode - which is convenient for colourising in XHTML (if you want to record an automated process say).

vilhelm_s15 anni fa

Here is an example illustrating what I mean:

    #include <stdio.h>
    int main() {
       while (1) {
           fprintf(stdout, "Hi.\n");
           fprintf(stderr, "Hello.\n");
       }
       return 0;
    }

If you run this program directly from the shell, every odd line says Hi and every even line says Hello. But if you run it through sexec (on a Linux machine at least), you get a large block of lines saying Hi, followed by a large block saying Hello, etc. Whether this is a problem or not of course depends on the use case. But to avoid it you need something more sophisticated than just pipes, e.g. the LD_PRELOAD hack in the original post.

colmmacc15 anni fa

Now I get you. I'm tempted to write a small pty allocator which does enough to allow isatty() return true.

catwell15 anni fa

Or you could just disable buffering, for instance with the unbuffer tool that comes with Expect:

    ./mytest | tee out.txt # blocks of Hello. and Hi.
    unbuffer ./mytest | tee out.txt # expected result

burgerbrain15 anni fa

Without looking at it's source, what 'unbuffer' does is likely allocate a PTY for the things under it. That's how the rest of Expect works after all ;)

udp15 anni fa

I may be wrong, but I always thought stderr was for diagnostic messages as well as errors, in which case red wouldn't really be appropriate.

I almost think we need another output stream for something that's neither an error nor output of the program.

Jach15 anni fa

I don't know, I kind of have mixed feelings about adding another stream. I'd probably find stdinfo and stdwarn useful. But it's a slippery slope to duplicating the features of a full logging system; you might add stdinfo, stdwarn, stdfine, stdfiner, stdfinest, stdconfig, std$custom, etc. etc.

One nice thing about having only stdout and stderr is it pushes you to ask: "Is this piece of information actually necessary to display to the user or should it just be logged to a file somewhere?" I'm not sure everyone really asks that though. Every time someone shoves a bunch of needless information to stderr "just in case" is a time I have to 2> /dev/null. (At least the useless stuff is often in stderr so I don't have to grep it out of stdout.)

jzwinck15 anni fa

C++ has std::clog (http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/iostream/clog/) but most people haven't heard of it and it maps to stderr anyway.

anko15 anni fa

I think this is a marvellous idea.

I would love to see a meta stream, that allows you to mark up semantics of stdout/stderr.

How would you go about creating a new standard stream?

apinstein15 anni fa

Or, add this to .zshrc:

# colorize all stderr red exec 2>>(while read line; do print '\e[91m'${(q)line}'\e[0m' > /dev/tty; print -n $'\0'; done &)

works like a charm.

1amzave15 anni fa

Though I'm not a zsh user, my first reaction was likewise "meh, my shell can do that", and so I whipped up a pretty much identical command (only using sed). However, when it didn't behave quite as I expected, I dug a little deeper and ended up with (what was to me) a curious discovery: bash prints its prompt to stderr rather than stdout (see http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/bash.git/tree/parse.y#n5013).

Anyone know why it does that?

burgerbrain15 anni fa

That's a great question. Zsh and tcsh both use stdout for their prompt, ksh and dash use stderr for the prompt itself but stdout for whatever the user is typing into the prompt. Bash, at least as it's configured on my system, seems to use stderr for the prompt and whatever the user types on it.

I really can't think of a reason that the way tcsh and zsh handle this isn't the proper way. Surely the principle of least surprise applies here.

sickill15 anni fa

This is the solution I started with. However it's messing line order sometimes due to race conditions/buffering.

apinstein15 anni fa

Yeah we're getting that issue, too. And sometimes the prompt doesn't appear properly.

bdonlan15 anni fa

This actually doesn't work for processes using stderr on eglibc 2.13 - fprintf internally outputs via a different path that can't be hooked in this manner. On x86, you could try overwriting the system call gate pointer to a hook function, but on x86_64 you're basically stuck, unless you attach a debugger or something.

Also, the write prototype is incorrect (using int instead of size_t) and could break on 64-bit machines.

sickill15 anni fa

Thx, will fix int -> size_t.

sovande15 anni fa

The concept may be useful for someone, but the implementation is just slow, naive and definitely not something you want to interpose your libc write function with. If the author is reading this; 'man (2) writev' for a quick code and efficiency improvement.

sickill15 anni fa

I am not C programmer. Actually this piece of code is my first C code since over 10 years. I might have forgotten about all good practices and stuff. But it works for me so I shared. Would you like to contact me and point slow, naive points or even better improve it and send pull request?

[deleted]15 anni fa

sovande15 anni fa

The slow point mainly refers to allocating and copy into a new buffer. The naive points refers to that you use 1) alloca to allocate an unknown amount of memory on the stack and 2) assume that write is atomic, never fails and will write the whole buffer (you return count). Instead you should return what write actually wrote or not. There are also a whole can of worms with regards to what happens during (signal) interrupt or if write failed to write the whole buffer. In which case the reset color code may not be sent etc etc. Solutions to this require some fine-thinking, but for the slow stuff, you can simply replace all the allocation and copy with something like this

  struct iovec iov[3] = {{STDERR_COLOR, STDERR_COLOR_SIZE},{buf, count},{COL_RESET, COL_RESET_SIZE}};
  ssize_t n = 0;
  do { n = writev(2, iov, 3);} while (n == -1 && errno == EINTR);
  return n;

cnvogel15 anni fa

While it might not be relevant in practice, there's the possibility of data corruption if someone closes all filedescriptors (for whatever reason) and then operates on the newly generated ones. This implementation just checks for filedescriptor number 2, a more sensible implementation for sure should hook the stdio FILE or iostream mechanisms to restrict colorization only to the "standard error" case.

for(i=0;i<1024;i++) close(i); /* close a lot of fd /

/ open will yield the lowest free fds, here it's 0,1,2 /

f=open("inputfile",O_RDONLY);

g=open("outputfile1",O_RDWR|O_CREAT,0666);

h=open("outputfile2",O_RDWR|O_CREAT,0666);

read(f,buf,1024);

write(g,buf,1024);

write(h,buf,1024); / <-- data is colorized! */

kelnos15 anni fa

The isatty() check should cover most cases of badness. Assuming "outputfile2" is a regular file, the data will not get colorized in your example.

sickill15 anni fa

Thx for catching this. Interesting in making pull request? ;)

sickill15 anni fa

Btw, as kelnos said, isatty() check "should" prevent all bad scenarios.

[deleted]15 anni fa

jrabone15 anni fa

Well, I suppose it's one step up from embedding ANSI escape sequences in your output. Various crappy Ruby tools do this and it makes Windows development SUCH a joy.

Free clue: the world is not a 1960s UNIX terminal. If you don't want to support Windows, that's fine - don't. I'll use something else or write my own. If you DO claim to "work" on Windows, read the goddamn docs and don't just blindly emit escape sequences on std(out|err) because it DOES NOT WORK.

It's not that hard to support Windows console IO, and it's well documented. I've previously written a (commercial) Java native library to provide curses-style character-at-a-time support for Java running in a terminal, using curses on UNIXalikes and a choice of Win32 console or Cygwin curses on Windows, although Cygwin curses at the time didn't correctly recognise Ctrl-Space (makes supporting Emacs keybindings a non-starter). Win32 has a considerably saner console implementation IMO.

alextingle15 anni fa

What a bizarre rant.

This is a libc/LD_PRELOAD hack, so it's clearly a Unix-only solution. Where did all these "you'll break my Windows console" tears come from??

jrabone15 anni fa

What's bizarre about it? Clearly this library isn't the problem. What'd be even better would be a sane console standard that isn't stuck with being backwards compatible with a 7 bit everything-is-a-character protocol. The acoustic coupler is dead people, get over it! Relegate termcap / terminfo / curses / getty to the same bin we dumped Gandalf serial line multiplexors in, and move forward!

burgerbrain15 anni fa

UTF-8 works quite nicely across terminals you know.

Anyway, if you want to discard the classical model terminal stack, invent something better first. You can't just declare that we should bin it without providing a viable alternative.

jrabone15 anni fa

What has UTF-8 got to do with anything? I'm talking about 7 bit VT100 escape sequences for single keys (which in turn require millisecond-accurate timing code in e.g. curses to distinguish from just pressing the same keys.) UTF-8 is beautiful by comparison.

As for an API, see (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms68...). Java even uses the exact same virtual key codes for AWT KeyEvent. I suspect at some point they were just included from the equivalent Windows header but it's been a while since I looked at the Sun JVM source code.

burgerbrain15 anni fa

Strictly speaking, "characters" in UTF-8 are not all 7 bits or 1 byte long, and they can be dumped across terminals. So my point is that another solution is technically possible without changing anything else.

Anyway, if the windows terminal stuff works for you, then right on. It is not adequate for many of us however. And for that matter, I agree with roel_v that the windows method is much more cumbersome for evenly moderately complicated things.

Edit: Also, delayed interpretation is a fairly common alternative to timing.

jrabone15 anni fa

Thank you, I'm well aware of how Unicode in general and UTF-8 in particular work.

While it would be possible to extend Unicode to carry terminal control sequences (or invent yet another standard to do so) my opinion is that having an out-of-band API is better than in-band sequences - most real terminals of the VT100 vintage had BOTH. This is no longer true, and the support for in-band control sequences is a source of much incompatibility. Remember when we replaced termcap with terminfo? Oh how we laughed.

What do you think is missing from the Win32 Console API, out of interest? I ask because I've written cross platform terminal components and ended up using curses on UNIX because that is the only sane way to interact with terminals; hardly a lightweight or even very portable solution, and that's before we start talking about licensing issues.

burgerbrain15 anni fa

I won't argue that out of band communication has advantages, because it does. However, if you want the windows method to have the same functionality as the traditional method, you are eventually going to have to send those things down the wire. (I don't know if it is already capable of doing this).

So really all it gets you boils down (as far as I can tell) to out of band control sequences^. At this point it hardly matters what exactly your control sequence specification is, and the windows Console API essentially becomes the new curses (while inheriting many of the problems of the traditional system, unless you can magically keep everybody in sync).

This simply is not all worth replacing everything to achieve.

And to be blunt, the advantages that out of band control provide quite likely do not outweigh the benefits afforded by in band control for most of us. For example, observe the triviality of the subject of this discussion. Unless you are on the receiving end, I would say it really does make everything easier.

PS: If you use PDCurses then you shouldn't have GPL issues. Sticking to (at least the features provided by) PDCurses will also clear up most portability issues.

^ As an example of what I mean, IIRC you can check out what ssh does when you give it the -t flag. There is some out of band communication in the traditional system after all.

jrabone15 anni fa

I don't think we'd reinvent or replace all of curses, as it does more than raw terminal handling (e.g. logical windowing). In my mind it's a layer on top of an area of displayed text. Win32 console doesn't implement any of that either.

I'm talking about the layer that interprets the in-band escape sequences of actual type-able characters into logical functions (e.g. ESC[4D into "cursor back 4 spaces"), and the databases of long-obsolete hardware quirks that go with it. Replacing that with something closer to the actual keyboards people use (e.g. vt100 didn't HAVE F1-F4 keys, the codes for them are another non-standard area) shouldn't be so dramatic a change, especially when what we think of as remote text terminals these days are typically two fully featured computers running SSH. Perhaps a remote terminal API should just be an SSH protocol extension?

burgerbrain15 anni fa

Hmmm. Interesting idea. OpenSSH's X forwarding is probably is at least idealogical precedent for doing something like that with SSH.

roel_v15 anni fa

It's quite a pain though to get console coloring to work properly on Windows. I wrote a utility once that batch scripts could call to set the fore/background color (just a call to SetConsoleTextAttribute() really) but in practice it's quite a pain to write scripts that color their output properly (especially once you start mixing languages of those scripts). The terminal-emulator-that-interprets-escape-sequences-as-color-change-commands is much easier for that purpose.

xutopia15 anni fa

Are you forced by work to use Windows?

jrabone15 anni fa

Actually, no - I use Linux on the desktop at work, and Windows by choice elsewhere. However, after more than 10 years of pain I've had it with cross-platform code that isn't. I KNOW that this library isn't SUPPOSED to be cross-platform, that was my point - at least this is better than hardcoded ANSI escapes in strings!

[deleted]15 anni fa

tzury15 anni fa

This is my python version (for logger)

https://gist.github.com/1474991

strlen15 anni fa

Why did you truncate a size_t to an int?

sickill15 anni fa

Will fix that, thx.

anko15 anni fa

with the stderred LD_PRELOAD alias this works for me: stderred python -c 'import os; print "Yo!"; os.write(2, "Jola\n\r")' but this doesn't; stderred ruby -e 'puts "Yo!";STDERR.write "Jola\n\r"'

if i do an strace the writes are going to the same file descriptors.. any ideas?

sickill15 anni fa

Maybe ruby's write() is not using write() from libc but other function like fprintf?

mwsherman15 anni fa

I like command lines, but often make fun of people that prefer them over well-produced GUIs. I suppose the reason is that well-produced GUIs are rare.

That being said: turning text red is notable? In 2011?

(Will accept downvotes with dignity.)

cleverjake15 anni fa

It's less of a unique idea, and more of a why-didn't-I-think-of-that sort of thing, in my opinion.

wladimir15 anni fa

What, you're trying to start a GUI versus command-line argument? On hacker news? In 2011?

bnegreve15 anni fa

Turning all error messages red systemwide is a neat result.

noeleon15 anni fa

can it somehow incorporate the blink tag as well?

burgerbrain15 anni fa

(Unfortunately) yes, only some terminal emulators support it though.

[deleted]15 anni fa

joh6nn15 anni fa

thank you. this is probably the cleanest way to do this i've seen, and i've seen a LOT of ways to do this.

anon_d15 anni fa

How the hell is this even remotely clean?

joh6nn15 anni fa

"cleanest way i've seen" != "ideal"

it isn't a horrible mangling of pipes and/or file descriptors, or some custom wrapper script that you have to run before every command, or any of the other frightening ways to do this that i've seen. it's a simple library that you can load or unload easily, that works system wide, without being an impenetrable, unmaintainable mess. as far as these things go, that's clean.

burgerbrain15 anni fa

Yeah, this is a tad hackish for my tastes honestly, makes to many assumptions.

The way I came up with while brainstorming a while ago (never got around to fully implementing it) is to create a PTY wrapper that you can fire off a program with.

Basically it creates a new PTY and wires it up to it's own controlling PTY, and forks of a child under the new one. You can then trivially do a lot of things transparently, like separating stdout and stderr (normally both stdout and stderr would be attached to the slave side of the PTY (/dev/tty), but if you attach them to a different fd then the select on the master/parent side can do things like color them).

EDIT: if it helps you picture it, this is basically doing userland STREAMS ;)

I'd estimate you could do this for around 250 lines of C. Maybe I'll see what I can do after dinner.

burgerbrain15 anni fa

Ok, banged this together: https://gist.github.com/1474748

Based off jgreco's 'vindication': https://github.com/jgreco/vindication

Usage:

  `./redwrapper python -c 'import os; print "Yo!"; os.write(2, "Jola\n\r");'`
  `./redwrapper zsh`

(zsh works with it, but bash doesn't currently for some stupid reason. something about what it expecting stderr to be /dev/tty or something I believe).

This is rough code, if you want to use regularly/seriously I suggest reviewing the code. I didn't pay attention much to standards compliance, I've only tested on Linux right now. I know that PTY stuff can get hairy on different *nix's, so beware of that.

EDIT: whoops, remove that '-g -lefence' from the Makefile too before you use this.

roel_v15 anni fa

You'd have to modify every script you ever run on a machine, and modify every command you ever type in, to make this work. Any serious solution to this problem needs to be 100% transparent to the user - i.e., wrapper programs are not an option.

burgerbrain15 anni fa

No, you can just run your shell under it. You certainly wouldn't want to actually modify anything.

The following sequence works:

  `./redwrapper zsh
  `python -c 'import os; print "Yo!"; os.write(2, "Jola\n\r");'`

This is because the values of stderr/stdout are inherited, unless they are purposely overwritten (redirection or anything that allocates it's own PTY (like 'ssh'), both of which of course disables 'red-ification').

Anyway, neither of these solutions are something I would ever deploy in an "always on" setup (although it could be done in mine as well). You certainly wouldn't want to do it for your users, so they're always going to have to type something (or mess their shell's init files, which should work for mine as well).

So this is about as transparent to the user as I dare make it. Unfortunately it is not 100% transparent to the programs you are running under it since they can figure out that stderr is not /dev/tty. Nothing seems to care, with the exception of bash, which uses stderr for seemingly everything inexplicably.

joeyh15 anni fa

Or you can just modify screen(1)

[deleted]15 anni fa

bdonlan15 anni fa

If you split stdout and stderr, you can end up with the order of output changing - your output process might not get around to reading its input ends until it has data at both, and then it can't tell which is which.

burgerbrain15 anni fa

"If you split stdout and stderr, you can end up with the order of output changing"

That is true. I find it doesn't matter terribly much in practice though. Obviously with some programs it might.

"your output process might not get around to reading its input ends until it has data at both, and then it can't tell which is which."

I'm not quite sure what you mean.

J_Darnley15 anni fa

Er, why would you want all the text to be red?

wladimir15 anni fa

Well if you don't like red, with a 256-color terminal emulator you could change it into a nice shade of purple instead:

    static const char PURPLE[]     = "\x1b[38;5;129m"
    #define STDERR_COLOR PURPLE

Or something more sane: http://www.mudpedia.org/wiki/Xterm_256_colors

burgerbrain15 anni fa

Not all of it, just stderr (so not stdout). This is useful because many things use stdout for regular output and stderr for error output (some things just use stdout for both, but that's not very nice as it disables doing things like this).

bouncingsoul15 anni fa

I think they're suggesting just styling "Error:" in red and then using normal text for the actual message.

npm does something like that: http://i.imgur.com/7oBLP.png

burgerbrain15 anni fa

Well you can do that with a standard unix filter. This does all of stderr.

bouncingsoul15 anni fa

Whoops. I thought this was a tool for script authors, not the end user. Now I get it, and I think it's way cool. And I think J_Darnley doesn't like red.

J_Darnley15 anni fa

To reply to everyone here, I still don't get why you want all text on stderr to be coloured, be it red or purple.

Most programs can write data to stdout so they put all messages on stderr. Making it all coloured hides the errors in the rest of the text.

Making errors red, or any other colour, is a good idea. It makes "under-experienced users" notice them.

burgerbrain15 anni fa

I'm getting terribly confused by your confusion, so forgive me if I'm not addressing your concern..

If the program is mixing "info" level messages and "error" level messages (to use the syslog terms for them) on stderr, there really isn't much we can do about it. The understanding however is that things on stderr are probably things that the user wants to read.

Coloring both of these red shouldn't hide them anymore than coloring both of them white, except now they are both easily discernible from the 'data' coming out of stdout (which is our goal).

Possible aside: the proper way to write/read from the terminal in cases where your stdin/stdout were redirected is to just open up /dev/tty yourself. Any program that does that will not have that text colored by any of the solutions I've seen here.

Xuzz15 anni fa

On OSX, you might be able to do something similar using dyld's interposing feature (http://opensource.apple.com/source/dyld/dyld-132.13/include/...) to replace write() and the dyld equivalent to LD_PRELOAD, DYLD_INSERT_LIBRARIES.

wmobit15 anni fa

The alloca usage here terrifies me.

burgerbrain15 anni fa

That is a good point. I don't know if write has a limit on 'count' (I can't find anything saying that it does), but if it's simply "whatever you can fit in size_t" then you certainly want to be careful about putting that on your stack. Failed alloca's don't really give you any indication, though you might sigsegv later.

sickill15 anni fa

What would you suggest instead then? I'm not C programmer.

burgerbrain15 anni fa

Avoid the allocation entirely. Use writev for example (or just use multiple 'write's, if you don't care about it being atomic).

sickill15 anni fa

Thx. Improved version in master: https://github.com/sickill/stderred/blob/master/stderred.c

tlrobinson15 anni fa

Nice hack. Ideally it would just be a feature of the shell. At least it does a isatty check though.

Is there a reason you allocate a bunch of memory and copy the strings rather than just doing multiple writes?

    (*lol_write)(fd, STDERR_COLOR, STDERR_COLOR_SIZE);
    (*lol_write)(fd, buf, count);
    (*lol_write)(fd, COL_RESET, COL_RESET_SIZE);

bdonlan15 anni fa

Or use writev for that matter.

Note that using ordinary write multiple times has atomicity implications - if you have multiple processes writing to STDERR, you might find their output interleaved in unfortunate ways. Using a single write with a temporary buffer or writev avoids this (provided you're not writing more than PIPE_BUF bytes total)

nviennot15 anni fa

Indeed: https://github.com/sickill/stderred/pull/1

agwa15 anni fa

I agree that writev is a better approach. But your patch doesn't look thread-safe because it uses that static iovec struct.

nviennot15 anni fa

You are right, and there are other issues: - I don't return the proper return value (should not return the number of bytes from the color strings) - I don't handle the case where writev() returns a number of bytes between 0 and count (e.g. You are writing 10Mb of data, a signal arrives, and you only wrote 5Mb -- the color thing will get all confused)

kelnos15 anni fa

The reason would be interleaving if more than one process is writing to stderr.

I was more bothered by the use of alloca(). Even on a 32-bit system with a 32-bit size_t, you can blow your stack to hell with a single call to this modified write(). Having to do a full malloc() here would be pretty lame, but as others suggested, writev() should do nicely.

The other nice property of using writev() is that you don't have to bother with the dlopen/dlsym crap. Can just call writev() directly from the overridden write() in either case.

Of course, that doesn't catch people writing to stderr using writev() directly, but I think that's ok. (The current impl doesn't catch that case anyway.)

(edit: pull request submitted! https://github.com/sickill/stderred/pull/6)

sickill15 anni fa

Like bdolan said, it would have atomicity implications this way. I agree it would be lighter on memory but in some cases output might break if many processes were writing to stderr at the same time.

derleth15 anni fa

Ubuntu does indeed allow multi-arch distros. I've run 32-bit Firefox on 64-bit Ubuntu for years; in fact, I'm doing so now.

sickill15 anni fa

Allright, maybe. But it still has DST ($LIB token) disabled in LD_PRELOAD.

derleth15 anni fa

Maybe? What's maybe about it? I can build (using -m32) and run 32-bit x86 binaries on an x86-64 platform.

sickill15 anni fa

I didn't mean that you can't run 32-bit binaries on 64-bit OS, what I meant was that AFAIK you can't install 32-bit deb packages together with 64-bit ones on 64-bit Ubuntu. Correct me if I'm wrong.

obtu15 anni fa

You can install both. The new multiarch support builds blahblah:i386 and blahblah (implicitly blahblah:amd64) debs for source packages that have it enabled. Before that, packages that wanted to provide i386 binaries on amd64 wrote their own extra build support, and added a suffix to the binary package names to avoid collisions.

Here's what I found on how to support LD_PRELOAD without a $LIB dynamic string token:

Looking at this: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/12/msg00300.html it seems you could put a relative path in LD_PRELOAD and count on the linker to use architecture-dependent search paths. I'll also link these two threads for context, though they didn't provide answers: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.glibc.user/974 (chatting) http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=372626 (concatenating the two libs in LD_PRELOAD works, but is noisy).

derleth15 anni fa

OK, we got our signals crossed there.

tlrobinson15 anni fa

On OS X:

    gcc stderred.c -D_GNU_SOURCE -Wall -ldl -fPIC -shared -o lib/stderred.dyld
    alias stderred='DYLD_INSERT_LIBRARIES=$PWD/lib/stderred.dyld DYLD_FORCE_FLAT_NAMESPACE=1'
    stderred python -c 'import os; print "Yo!"; os.write(2, "Jola\n\r")'

(replace $PWD with the absolute path if you're adding this to your shell config, of course)

sickill15 anni fa

Cool, looks like the same gcc flags works for OSX.