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

391–400 of 933 posts

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#391

Post by icc97 »

I know what is being proposed is a whole lot more, but the GNU command line tools that come with msys git are pretty extensive.

The example commands from the article are all available with the git distribution:

> cp -a

> find | xargs | rename

> grep | xargs | sed

You can do all that - plus ssh (with ssh-agent) from the DOS prompt (you don't need PS, PuTTY or git bash).

There's vim too that comes with syntax highlighting, for which there's solarized dark/light colour palettes for the DOS prompt [1], as well as decent enough consolas fonts that you can use.

You can do an `ls *.exe` in the C:\Program Files\Git\usr\bin directory to see the list of programs that are there.

Now that Windows 10 has done some 20 year late improvements to the underlying console window [2], you can properly resize the window and the text flows properly.

The only thing I miss are the `history` and `!` commands for which I wrote a hacky bat file implementation of [3].

Edit: Clink [4] appears to be a fully compatible GNU history (Readline) implementation.

Chocolatey is pretty awesome too.

[1]: https://github.com/neilpa/cmd-colors-solarized

[2]: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/mt427362.aspx

[3]: https://ianchanning.wordpress.com/2014/10/29/dos-command-his...

[4]: http://mridgers.github.io/clink/

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#392

Post by teacup50 »

captainmuon wrote: post #313
barrkel wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

From the screenshots, it seems there is a full kernel in there - e.g. you have /proc/cpuinfo, and it identifies as Linux 3.4.0. If they just implemented all Linux syscalls on top of NT, that would replace a Linux kernel. There would be no Linux kernel running on top. But in that case they would also need to emulate stuff like /proc. (This is the "reverse Wine" scenario.) So I personally think it is either: - There is…

FreeBSD's linux compatibility layer does exactly this; it reports as "Linux", there's a linprocfs implementation that provides a Linux /proc, etc.

It's a lot easier to emulate syscalls than it is to do something like CoLinux. Additionally, I can't imagine Microsoft would EVER let GPL'd Linux code into their kernel.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#393

Post by matt_wulfeck »

zxcvcxz wrote: post #365
stcredzero wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

microsoft is leveraging FOSS Linux to get Mac users. I think it's a real smart move. Apple leveraged a form of BSD -nix to get developer mindshare. Now Microsoft is leveraging FOSS Linux to leapfrog Apple. It is a smart move. While OS X isn't bad for -nix-like development, it still involves jumping through hoops and compromises. (Homebrew/Macports)

I believe there will be many hoops to jump through to use this as a development environment too, and the limitations of this ABI will be plenty.

The thing I'm wondering is how it will handle launching daemons. It doesn't look like there's systemd or upstart integration, and without something like screen it quickly becomes a hot mess.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#394

Post by homulilly »

Is this still going to be using the absolutely dreadfull conhost? Because that's the biggest shortcoming windows currently has with its interactive command line tools, cmd.exe and powershell are both usable, not great (okay, pretty bad honestly, but usable) when you don't consider the shitty terminal they force you into using.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#395

Post by xorblurb »

zxcvcxz wrote: post #359
msoad wrote: post #8

So what OS you're going to get when you run an application under this? So if I run this: node -e 'console.log(require("os").type())' What it's going to print?

I just see this as a headache for developers. I don't want or need a Linux ABI, I just want to run a Linux container on Windows (if I have to use windows, which I would prefer not to do). If node running on windows needs access to a database running on the Linux layer then what happens when things aren't working? They can't possibly make all programs interact in a seamless way. I'm imagining frankenstein programs tha…

If you want a Linux container on Windows (which they do not seem to propose right away, but it seems a logical step), you need a Linux ABI.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#396

Post by lmm »

stingraycharles wrote: post #376
iamcurious wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You jest, but I agree. I might accept a GNU/Windows machine as a working computer, but I would be a lot more weary of accepting just a Windows machine.

Would this be possible? How far could anyone (outside of Microsoft) strip down Windows to leave behind just a kernel with a functioning GNU environment (let's say, a shell and file access) ?

I ran bb4win as my window manager for a while. You can get a full suite of userspace applications e.g. KDE for windows. If you're too much of a purist to use cygwin you can (or could until recently) build everything against SUA and then you just need to run a windows X server, but at that point you're still running explorer as the graphical shell/window manager.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#397

Post by 794CD01 »

stingraycharles wrote: post #376
iamcurious wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You jest, but I agree. I might accept a GNU/Windows machine as a working computer, but I would be a lot more weary of accepting just a Windows machine.

Would this be possible? How far could anyone (outside of Microsoft) strip down Windows to leave behind just a kernel with a functioning GNU environment (let's say, a shell and file access) ?

Since 2008R2, Windows has had a Server Core version that is trying to move closer and closer to that goal.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#398

Post by snhkicker »

hodwik wrote: post #48

How in God's green earth did Canonical think helping Microsoft with this was a good idea for the Linux community?

I hear you they think its a good thing everyone i know says now no need to stay on linux i'm switching to windows 10 at least my colleages are doing so now

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#399

Post by zeveb »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #172
x1798DE wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not move to Linux?

Just out of curiosity, what does a Linux desktop offer that's not also natively offered in Mac and also highly polished? Every year I try a switch to Linux desktop. This year I made it as far as trying to get multiple monitors working well. I also dabbed in gaming. In the end I went back to my work=Mac game=Windows duopoly.

> Just out of curiosity, what does a Linux desktop offer that's not also natively offered in Mac and also highly polished?

A GNU userland. A plethora of tiling window managers. A selection of clean terminals. Every single thing Debian's or Arch's repos offer which one must turn to brew for.

And of course there's freedom too, which is nice.

> Every year I try a switch to Linux desktop. This year I made it as far as trying to get multiple monitors working well.

I've got multiple monitors running on Linux, over HDMI, at home & at work, at differing resolutions & orientations. I use arandr-configured xrandr scripts which set my desired orientation with a quick keystroke in my window manager. What more does one need?

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#400

Post by new_hackers »

ilmiont wrote: post #140

I wonder what implications this has for SSH for PowerShell... Microsoft were originally planning to release native SSH in PowerShell this summer. But now it seems redundant when you could just use Bash anyway...

what these guys said, also when you consider that automating tasks for both your WinRM-able and SSH-able machines would be very easy. Does bash support WinRM or WMI as well as PowerShell?
Post reply on HN