Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ubuntu on Windows

blog.dustinkirkland.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 933 posts

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#261

Post by poofyleek »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #80
poofyleek wrote: post #56

How do they handle various NTFS related issues? https://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/using-specialnames.html

I'm reading between the lines, but it looks like the linux subsystem is using a separate file system. So you'll have the usual problems when using files from /mnt/c, but other files are mounted in a unixy file system of some sort. The Ubuntu file system is mounted onto your Windows subsystem at C:\Users\ \AppData\Local\Lxss\rootfs\, according to the article.

I'm guessing you are right. The usual problems with /mnt/c. I was wondering about rootfs being per user as well. On a server that may be a problem, but perhaps not on a laptop. It sounds like this is not meant to be the basis for production level deployments, but useful for development.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#262

Post by hughw »

barrkel wrote: post #53
captainmuon wrote: post #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 nic…

I expect they implemented a subsystem for Linux at the syscall level - i.e. they implemented the Linux kernel's interface at the ABI level. No headers would need to intermingle with open source; compile on Linux, run on Windows.

They could call it ENIW.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#264

Post by sabelo »

takeda wrote: post #233

Surprised I don't see anyone else mentioning this. This looks to me like typical Microsoft strategy that they utilized a lot 25 years ago. 1. when not leader in given market, make your product fully compatible with competitor 2. start gaining momentum (e.g. why should I use Linux, when on Windows I can run both Linux and Windows applications) 3. once becoming leader break up compatibility 4. rinse and repeat Happened…

Embrace, extend and extinguish. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#265

Post by kuschku »

xienze wrote: post #253
kuschku wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, you can share directories between the native filesystem and the VM quite easily. And if you're using something like VirtualBox or VMWare there are "unity" windowing modes available. I tried them – they don’t work at all in KDE. Arch linux host, KDE as DE, Windows 10 Guest, just leads to a big black box in unified mode, and windows don’t properly occur in the KDE taskbar. What I expect is integration equal to…

Maybe it's a KDE problem? Other people certainly have been successful. But I guess that's par for the course in Linux -- lots of incompatibilities depending on how your environment is set up. Something like WINE is never gonna get there for running games as well as a VM can. So the options realistically are using a VM or reboot. The VM option is really pretty good all things considered.

That issue was with the VM in unified mode.

With WINE, everything works fine – but not with UPlay.

So I can run the game, via UPlay in the VM (but not unified mode), or I can pirate it and run it in WINE.

But unified mode, or paid in WINE, doesn’t work.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#266

Post by ramy_d »

NateDad wrote: post #259
tkinom wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can windows 10 apt-get install/run most/all the x/gtk base apps apt-get build from source those apps. ? If so, I will consider switch.

No. No GUI applications (currently, and no announced future support... and I wouldn't bank on them doing it).

vim?

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#267

Post by noelsusman »

talawahdotnet wrote: post #242
crudbug wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think M$ is targeting more developers with *NIX background on the desktop side rather than Linux apps on server. So a bash support with uniform CLI is the end-game.

Yea, I think they are going after developers who use OS X because it is UNIXy. Smart move given how en vogue Apple laptops have become for developers these days.

It kinda makes me regret my MBP purchase last fall. I really wanted a Surface Pro but I couldn't deal with developing on Windows.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#268

Post by brlewis »

jacquesm wrote: post #238
omarforgotpwd wrote: post #139

Imagine going back in time to the 90s and telling people that in 2016 Microsoft would bend over backwards to make sure Windows could run Linux ELF binaries natively in the kernel by converting syscalls. You'd probably be laughed at.

No, they'd point to Kerberos and ask what the difference is.

Microsoft wasn't trying very hard to make their Kerberos compatible with MIT Kerberos, at least in the mid '90s. I think you'd still be laughed at, especially since Windows was ubiquitous, Unix was niche, and Linux was a niche within a niche.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#270

Post by wmccullough »

sabelo wrote: post #264
takeda wrote: post #233

Surprised I don't see anyone else mentioning this. This looks to me like typical Microsoft strategy that they utilized a lot 25 years ago. 1. when not leader in given market, make your product fully compatible with competitor 2. start gaining momentum (e.g. why should I use Linux, when on Windows I can run both Linux and Windows applications) 3. once becoming leader break up compatibility 4. rinse and repeat Happened…

Embrace, extend and extinguish. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

Please GTFO. It's going to be awfully hard to extinguish all of their major technology When's it's developed in the wild and MIT licensed.
Post reply on HN