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

281–290 of 434 posts

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#281

Post by jjuel »

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…

Do you really think a multi billion dollar company like Microsoft wouldn't have their legal team all over this? Do you not think they would have researched this out. Discussed their implementation, and made sure everything they were doing was going to meet the GPL copyright standards?

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#282

Post by curt15 »

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…

MS doesn't seem to think that long-standing programming practices have suddenly been outlawed, as it is continuing to implement Apple's proprietary iOS frameworks in Project Islandwood (https://github.com/Microsoft/WinObjC). The ruling on API copyrightability does not set precedent in any of the courts that normally hear copyright cases.

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#283

Post by soundwave106 »

21 wrote: post #232
throwaway13337 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more broad than that. The distinction lies in production versus consumption devices. Tablets and phones are consumption. You can't do any serious work on them - development included. This is why laptops and computers have stuck around in spite of the proliferation of cheap, tiny, elegant consumption devices. So no, I don't think laptops and computers will go away for non-nerds, just for people who don't produce…

I would put Instagram or SnapChat firmly into the production column. While many do not like the "output" of this production, that does not change the fact. And a lot of music creation apps exist for tablets/phones. This production/consumption divide is too rigid.

For now, it is true that most "professional" productivity apps are on laptops / desktops.

Yes, there are ways to take photos and create music on tablets and phones. You can do some basic editing on them, even. But the "professional" tools for photography and music, with all the bells and whistles you can think of, are still dominated by laptop / desktop computer programs. (The dominant programs being Photoshop for images, and DAWs like Logic, Ableton Live, and Pro Tools for music.)

The distinction between "production" and "consumption" devices is indeed kind of too rigid in a sense that, of course, professionals will utilize the creative tools that come on tablets and phones, even if the desktop / laptop programs are the primary tool. Tablets also can shine as an extended interface for desktop programs. (EG: Logic Pro (and others) have apps that turns an iPad into a remote controller for the main DAW. There are programs like Astropad that turn your iPad into a Wacom-like tablet for Photoshop, etc.)

The obstacle is interface. The fine-tuned control of a tablet or (especially) a phone is much poorer than using a mouse and keyboard with a large screen. Until that gets resolved, I doubt desktops / laptops will go anywhere.

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#284

Post by JdeBP »

kchoudhu wrote: post #92
chx wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be shocked. As I mentioned above, I wouldn't expect wireshark to run either. From what we gathered so far, this is a syscall translation layer and > No new system calls are added for cgroups - all support for querying and modifying cgroups is via this cgroup file system. Per https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/cgroup-v1/cgroups.t...

No cgroups = no systemd. Windows: a better linux than linux.

There are lots of reasons that systemd will probably never run on the Windows NT Linux subsystem, a few reasons that upstart won't run, and the possibility that one could run daemontools family toolsets with a fair degree of success; but a likely overall problem with invoking a service manager such that it is in a daemon context (outwith a login session) in the first place.

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11416376

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#285

Post by evook »

zxcvcxz wrote: post #202
andkenneth wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would bet that it will only get better over time and include a fair amount of the things you are talking about in a few years time. It's obviously a big push to pick up the current "I use a mac for development cause it's unix" crowd, I'm sure they're taking it seriously and would want the support for developing in a unix style A+.

How will they pick up the crowd who chooses their OS because it's mostly FOSS and not a branch of the NSA used for mass data collection? Most devs I know care about privacy and it was one of the main reasons they switched from Windows. Most Linux programmers I know aren't Windows devs as much as the MS shill team would like everyone on social media to believe. You don't have to be part of the FOSS crowd to support FO…

Except if you expect a snappy UI.

OS X and Linux with X11 or even Wayland are easily 20 years behind windows in terms of UI responsiveness and snappiness. The constant input lag of unix desktops always drives me back to windows for my workstations, although I am a fullheart windows server hater and despite everything that comes with it. It's stable, extremely fast and when edited/hacked right also privacy aware.

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#286

Post by JdeBP »

chx wrote: post #35
manigandham wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Command prompt should run the windows version and bash should run the linux version. Why would there be an issue here?

Exactly. The Linux file system will have Windows mounted into it but I think Windows won't be able to see the Linux filesystem. We will see.

No. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11415671 .

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#287

Post by icebraining »

xorblurb wrote: post #272
talles wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This new Microsoft is open sourcing everything, maybe this own underlying implementation is on the way to be opened (maybe it's open somewhere already).

This implementation is definitively a work derived from the NT kernel. If reimplementing and API propagates copyright, the only allowed licensing situation would be that MS releases the complete NT kernel under the GNU GPLv2 license. This is not going to happen. And this is not a too bad news, because this might give us leverage (by estoppel) if MS ever wants to litigate against free software on the theory that reimp…

If reimplementing and API propagates copyright, the only allowed licensing situation would be that MS releases the complete NT kernel under the GNU GPLv2 license.

The GPL is not that expansive, it only extends to programs built upon GPL-licensed stuff, not for programs that just happen to have a GPL application running on them.

  A compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent works,
  which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work, and which
  are not combined with it such as to form a larger program, in or on a
  volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an “aggregate”
  if the compilation and its resulting copyright are not used to limit
  the access or legal rights of the compilation's users beyond what the
  individual works permit. Inclusion of a covered work in an aggregate
  does not cause this License to apply to the other parts of the aggregate.

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#289

Post by nailer »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #255
nailer wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sure, there are many (excellent) AST based editors. However an AST editor based on a keyboard, and requires you to learn to type at 160 WPM, won't help most tablets be good code creation devices.

Data structures are shapes. A shape is better drawn than described in text.

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#290

Post by tacos »

atgreen wrote: post #254
1_player wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Oracle's position is that their interfaces were Copyright (C) Oracle and to use them you had to abide by the license from Oracle.

The whole point of open source licenses is to make it explicitly clear what you're allowed to do with the (yes, still copyrighted) material. They too provide strict terms and require you to honor the license.

Post reply on HN