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

Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

blogs.msdn.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 434 posts

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#251

Post by captainmuon »

atgreen wrote: post #225

As I understand it, Microsoft has copied the Linux kernel system call interfaces and provided their own underlying implementation. Given that Microsoft supported Oracle's view that the structure, sequence, and organization of the Java programming interfaces were covered by copyright law, then surely they would also agree that the same holds true for the Linux kernel system call interfaces. I don't like the APIs-are-c…

One could argue that the Linux syscall interface is closer to an ABI than an API, since you don't directly code against it. Don't know what implications that has in this context, though.

One legal thing that I'm also wondering about is the "Linux" trademark. I thought the Linux Foundation kept close tabs on how you were allowed to use the trademark, and one requirement was that the Linux kernel was actually involved?

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#252

Post by cmdrfred »

Sometimes I feel like Microsoft is spying on me. I've used Windows since I've used computers, a few months ago I 'upgraded' to 10. Sure it was slower and unstable but I figured I'd give Microsoft some time to fix it and struggled on. Then one day I come home and my lock screen is a ad. Right then I downloaded Debian, made a usb drive and said goodbye to Microsoft on my personal machines forever. I'll never look back. A week or two later they announce this. Sorry Microsoft, after you get a taste of the power, customization and flexibility of Linux you never go back.

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#254

Post by atgreen »

1_player wrote: post #243
atgreen wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not talking about libc. I'm talking about the kernel system call interfaces. They are defined by the kernel, not libc.

IANAL but the kernel _code_ is GPL. Nothing forbids you to implement from scratch some functionality with a different license. As long as you don't copy and paste GPL code. A system call is a function entry point. The code executed when those functions are called is GPL licensed, and Microsoft wrote that from scratch.

What I'm pointing out is the absurdity of the current state of law. It doesn't matter if Microsoft wrote all of the code from scratch, because according to them the definitions of the interfaces alone -- not code and not header files -- fall under copyright law.

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#255

Post by TeMPOraL »

nailer wrote: post #174
Marazan wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plain text files are an incredibly powerful way of "storing ASTs", the advantages are far too numerous to list. The primary one being complete and total interoparability with all other tools that accept plain text files. I will bet you £100 that we won't be programming by speech and gestures in even 25 years time as the disadvantages are enormous.

Not saying we shouldn't store software as text. Just saying we don't need to make software with text.

Get a better editor - one that lets you operate on semantic units. And/or get a better programming language - one that lets you operate on code as AST.

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#256

Post by m_mueller »

zxcvcxz wrote: post #213
captainmuon wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bit offtopic, but 2009 was the year of the Linux Desktop for me (using Ubuntu). Performant on older hardware, eye candy (compiz) on newer hardware, the Gnome 2 interface was familiar and incredibly polished, and you had a lot of choice (linuxshouldbeaboutchoice.com). They lost me with all the rewriteritis and monodaemonisation that followed. I switched to MacOS (hackintosh) and was very happy for a while, since it…

>I've found Windows to be the OS that "just works" and gets out of my way I've had the opposite experience. Windows does not "just work" and it certainly does not "stay out of the way". I have USB headphones I can't use in Windows because they connect but Windows doesn't let me switch to them. When I plug in an external monitor my OS comes to a crawl and it doesn't speed back up until I restart the whole thing. When…

Totally agreed. 11y OSX user, tried to give Windows 10 a chance as the host system on a $2800 tablet (Vaio Canvas). HiDPI still a mess, tablet mode is worse than ever because it doesn't automatically bring up the keyboard for most apps (and even hides the keyboard tray icon by default - wtf?), system settings are complete and utter shit compared to OSX or even Windows 7, touchpad is unusable as always. Only good thing is the nice looking hardware, especially the stand, but it's tainted by the hideous power adapter (and very short batt. life no matter how you use it).

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#258

Post by dduarte »

evacchi wrote: post #45
sspiff wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm using it on my tablet instead of previously using a VMWare image and msys+mingw+cygwin. The main advantage over a VM is no resource partitioning: on a 4GB RAM tablet with 64GB eMMC, you can't allocate more than 2GB RAM to a VM without trouble, and putting 20GB of disk aside for it is also a pain., and much improved power efficiency (even an idle VM drastically reduces battery life, while Ubuntu for Windows doesn'…

since you are already up and running may I ask what friends have been asking me? Can you apt-get install zsh ?

I couldn't get zsh to work (same errors as tallanvor) but other shells did work, like fish with oh-my-fish. I had to run bash in ConEmu to be able to display some unicode characters (those used by powerline themes/fonts) - http://i.imgur.com/JT8Zi5j.png

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#259

Post by TeMPOraL »

golergka wrote: post #198
siscia wrote: post #49

I am a little scared from the distinction we are start to make between "computers" and "developers' computers" In most computer nowadays you cannot code (tables and smartphones), are computers doomed to be an expensive tool for few "nerd" ? What will be the impact on computer literacy ?

Have you met an average user? The mandatory updates, lack of permissions and sandboxing are only a good thing for a user with typical computer literacy level. Hell, even lack of window management in iOS/Android systems is making UX much more easier to understand for majority of users I know. My granddad, who was an excellent mechanical engineer, have been using computers for the last 20 years, and he still struggles…

> and he still struggles with click/double-click distinction.

Have you tried teaching him that? I highly doubt an old person, especially one with engineering background, will have trouble with understanding the distinction if someone bothers explaining it to them.

Or in general - it's surprising how much non-tech people can understand about technology if someone bothers to sit down with them and explain the concepts to them. Usually the reason they don't learn this stuff themselves is the typical human impulse of "if I haven't figured it out in 3 seconds flat, it's too difficult and I won't understand it".

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#260

Post by atgreen »

captainmuon wrote: post #251
atgreen wrote: post #225

As I understand it, Microsoft has copied the Linux kernel system call interfaces and provided their own underlying implementation. Given that Microsoft supported Oracle's view that the structure, sequence, and organization of the Java programming interfaces were covered by copyright law, then surely they would also agree that the same holds true for the Linux kernel system call interfaces. I don't like the APIs-are-c…

One could argue that the Linux syscall interface is closer to an ABI than an API, since you don't directly code against it. Don't know what implications that has in this context, though. One legal thing that I'm also wondering about is the "Linux" trademark. I thought the Linux Foundation kept close tabs on how you were allowed to use the trademark, and one requirement was that the Linux kernel was actually involved?

I'd say that this part of the ABI is definitely something people code directly against - so there's really no distinction between API and ABI. The parts of the ABI you don't are things like the function calling conventions, type widths, etc.
Post reply on HN