Live data from Hacker News

Ubuntu on Windows

blog.dustinkirkland.com

41–50 of 933 posts

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#41
post #5

> Windows 10 users > Can open the Windows Start menu > And type "bash" [enter] > Which opens a cmd.exe console Right... Bash is a shell, but your interaction with it is controlled by a terminal program. Unless there are some real changes to cmd.exe t̶h̶e̶n̶ ̶i̶t̶'̶s̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶i̶m̶p̶r̶e̶s̶s̶i̶v̶e̶ . You can compile a native bash and other utils now yourself, it's not that hard. EDIT: It's more like a Linuxul…

> Unless there are some real changes to cmd.exe then it's not that impressive.

There actually have been [1], and I imagine MS has continued to flesh out those improvements.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11046433

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#42
post #4

"Linux geeks can think of it sort of the inverse of "wine" -- Ubuntu binaries running natively in Windows. Microsoft calls it their "Windows Subsystem for Linux"." I find it amazing that you can have such a functional Ubuntu environment by translating system calls. Microsoft does have the advantage of Linux being open-source I suppose, while the Wine project had to reverse engineer DLLs. Or have you supply them on yo…

I would rather have the opposite. I would even pay for an official "Windows on Linux". There is a handful of games I would like to play, but other than that I have no interest in windows.

The problem is that the user-base for Windows on Linux probably isn't worth Microsoft's time...

While it seems like it is worth Microsoft's time to keep people on Windows.

I for one look forward to having all my vulnerabilities in one place... Linux, windows, server, desktop...

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#43
post #31

I'm confused what has this list: apt, ssh, rsync, find, grep, awk, sed, sort, xargs, md5sum, gpg, curl, wget, apache, mysql, python, perl, ruby, php, gcc, tar, vim, emacs, diff, patch... to do with Ubuntu?

They are programs which are included in the Ubuntu distribution.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#44
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather have the opposite. I would even pay for an official "Windows on Linux". There is a handful of games I would like to play, but other than that I have no interest in windows.

Totally doable. Use KVM to virtualize Windows and (the important part) make sure your CPU and motherboard support VT-d. Then you can pass a graphics card (separate from the one you run Linux with, naturally) to the VM and get >95% of native performance. There's lots of videos of folks doing this.

Hi. Do you mind linking one?

Thanks. :)

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#45
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather have the opposite. I would even pay for an official "Windows on Linux". There is a handful of games I would like to play, but other than that I have no interest in windows.

Totally doable. Use KVM to virtualize Windows and (the important part) make sure your CPU and motherboard support VT-d. Then you can pass a graphics card (separate from the one you run Linux with, naturally) to the VM and get >95% of native performance. There's lots of videos of folks doing this.

That's still "VM" not "Native".

You aren't running them "side by side"... you are running them "One inside the other".

Not exactly an apple-to-apple comparison.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#46
microsoft is leveraging FOSS Linux to get Mac users. I think it's a real smart move.

The author points to using grep and Xargs and some other tools to quickly update a package. That's the key here. These bash/Linux utilities are productivy boosters for all the Linux and Mac/bsd people out there. I can't imagine living without them and they're necessary for any system I develop on (which is currently a Mac).

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#47
A few random thoughts:

- Wow, hell is really freezing over!

- The hardest part of running bash and other posix things under windows is filesystem access. Windows uses drive letters and backslashes, unix has a root filesystem with forward slashes. It seems they are taking the same route as cygwin by "mounting" windows drives in /mnt/c (or /cygdrive/c).

- If you just wanted bash and some posix tools, the harder but nicer way would be to patch them to understand windows paths. It is not clear to me that it is even possible, for example many tools assume a path that does not start with a slash is a relative path - while "C:\" is absolute. You would also want to make more windows apps understand forward slashes like "C:/Windows". To make things even more complicated, there are NT native paths "\Device\HarddiskVolume4\Users\Bill", UNC paths "\\Server\share", and the crazy syntax "\\?\C:\MyReallyLongPath\File.txt".

- I am really surprised this works in an appx container. From my little dabbling with modern apps in Visual Studio, I've found that they are incredibly sandboxed - no filesystem access unless you go through a file picker, no network connections to localhost (!?), no control of top-level windows, no loading of external DLLs. You can get around most restrictions for sideloaded apps, but not for windows store apps. That they can now package such a complex application as a modern app (with maybe only the linux subsystem DLLs delivered externally) means that they are slowly moving the modern/universal apps and traditional Win32 apps together with regards to their powers.

- Running a Linux kernel in windows, and then ELF executables on top (without virtualization) is nothing new, see CoLinux or andLinux. If I understand correctly, this new work uses a new Linux NT subsystem. It remains to be seen if this is better (more performant) or worse (if the Linux kernel is just another process, and it crashes, it doesn't take down the system).

- If they actually wrote a NT subsystem for Linux, this opens a whole can of GPL licensing worms, as you'll need to include internal NT headers. However, they say it is closed source, so I wonder how they did it.

- This really stands and falls with how well it is integrated in the rest of the system. I want to install tools in "Ubuntu" via apt and use them from cmd.exe, and vice versa. And long term, a X11/Wayland bridge would be nice too.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#50
A performant fork - the single biggest problem with Cygwin - sounds awesome. As does the ability to run Linux binaries directly, opening up the direct use of binary package repos.

I wonder if I can use it via mintty instead of conhost.exe; at the very least, I could ssh into it from Cygwin.

As always, the devil is in the details; the rough edges where support peters out, or syscall inconsistencies creep in.

Post reply on HN