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

361–370 of 434 posts

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#361

Post by woodman »

cyphar wrote: post #107
woodman wrote: post #68

Does anybody know if this interface is Linux kernel functions + whatever POSIX is required to run Ubuntu stuff? I haven't seen that addressed, which strikes me as strange because it could have some pretty serious implications. Am I worrying over nothing, or could this make POSIX irrelevant pretty quickly as the new portability standard becomes the Linux ABI. I've cheered on Microsoft's recent moves in open source, bu…

It's Linux syscall emulation. As for the death of POSIX, many unixes have had the same (even superior) functionality for years. POSIX wasn't dead yesterday. It isn't dead today

Thanks for the clarification. I wish I could be as unconcerned, but I remember what IE did to web developers.

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#362

Post by ultramancool »

gberger wrote: post #359
ultramancool wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean? I pick up my Android phone and I've got an app that gives me a python shell, "terminal ide" which includes tons of cli developer tools like a C compiler and various editors, a full debian install I use for more secure SSH (using real openssh) and development and even some operations on various servers. There are full out Java IDEs on Android that you can install even. So here's just a few ways you c…

Sure, but how productive are you when coding on your phone vs on your desktop?

There's definitely a productivity hit, but it's also not the kind of thing that isolates people. For the cost of a cheap BT keyboard you can be fairly productive using just a tablet, even a phone maybe. If you have a TV and use casting, a phone could do quite well.

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#363

Post by ZenoArrow »

annnnd wrote: post #321
ZenoArrow wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "No, that doesn't suit my definition of native. ;)" Why is that? Because the containers are running in Hyper-V? From a user standpoint I doubt you'd notice any difference, especially once Hyper-V is supported in Windows 10: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/windowsserver/2016/04/04...

I would imagine resource consumption being much worse on Hyper-V because such containers are basicaly VMs. Am I mistaken?

If you need fast storage resources you may notice a performance hit. Performance for CPU and memory resources seems to be mostly the same as Docker on Linux.

https://caleblloyd.com/hardware/docker-performance-bare-meta...

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#364

Post by chx »

emilsedgh wrote: post #110
chx wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, Linux on the Desktop has just died. I expect both the KDE and Gnome projects dead within a (very few) years, probably X.org close behind. All hail Winux though. (That's the name for this mix I came up with.) Before you downvote this without thinking ... consider, for example, KDE is severely understaffed and this will deplete them further. Who will bother with X.org bugs and drivers now? What's the point? Who is…

KDE has always been understaffed and will always be understaffed. But it has been improving all the time with every single release. The problem is that you (and millions of people who were looking for Linux desktop to "win") are just not excited anymore since new form factors (phones, tablets) arrived. But I actually think Linux desktop is a winner. There are several high quality desktop enviroments suitable for all…

I am typing this from KDE. Obviously? I guess. And so what. That is not the problem.

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#365

Post by chx »

cyphar wrote: post #106
chx wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, Linux on the Desktop has just died. I expect both the KDE and Gnome projects dead within a (very few) years, probably X.org close behind. All hail Winux though. (That's the name for this mix I came up with.) Before you downvote this without thinking ... consider, for example, KDE is severely understaffed and this will deplete them further. Who will bother with X.org bugs and drivers now? What's the point? Who is…

I do all of the things you mention without problem. I don't definitely don't think GNU/Linux will die as a result. First off, syscall emulation will always be clunky. Secondly, many people care about their freedom. Thirdly, what makes you think that a majority of people using GNU/Linux will switch. I haven't had driver or network problems for the past 3 years on any of my various machines.

Congrats! What about this guy https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11445505 and what I typed up https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11413469 here.

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#366

Post by grimgrin »

ruffrey wrote: post #299

It's not on Ubuntu on Windows, right? It is Ubuntu bash on Windows via a compatibility layer.

A graphical layer isn't present, but you can apt-get install anything that runs in the background/command line. vim, emacs, etc. At least as far as I know.

A commenter here mentioned having difficulties installing java, however:

> if you go the apt-get route you get a sha256sum mismatch on both java7 & java8. If you try to be clever and manually download it and throw it in the cache, same story. If you try to be really really clever and manually download it and try to manually extract the tar it throws a bunch of cannot create symlink: invalid argument errors. I spent a good 2+ hours trying to force it to install in various ways. For now at least it seems java is not meant to be on Windows Bash.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11446913

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#367

Post by hellameta »

dboreham wrote: post #347

I wonder who came up with the "Bash on Windows" tagline. That was a really smart idea. I think most of us would have run with "Emulated Linux syscall layer from user mode processes on Windows". Promoting bash specifically seems to me like engineering marketing genius -- less technically knowledgeable people are more likely to be familiar with bash, while the more knowledgeable are going to think "wait...what? how do…

Is this sarcasm? Bash on Windows definitely comes before "Emulated Linux syscall layer from user mode processes on Windows" ... it's a great name, sure, but marketing genius?

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#368

Post by koenigdavidmj »

hsitz wrote: post #353
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…

"As I understand it, Microsoft has copied the Linux kernel system call interfaces and provided their own underlying implementation." Not sure your understanding is correct, but in any case is that not precisely what Wine does on Linux when running Windows apps? Are you worried about Windows copyright violations with Wine? From Wine webpage, "Wine translates Windows API calls into POSIX calls on-the-fly. . ." [1] [1]…

Windows doesn't provide consistency between versions at the interrupt level, and Wine doesn't provide any interface at that level. It's basically a COFF loader, and a bunch of regular userspace functions in DLLs that do everything.

Linux, on the other hand, provides exactly that, and this wrapper makes it so that you can actually run "movl $1, %eax; movl $0, %ebx; int $0x80" and it will actually call the equivalent of exit(0).

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#369

Post by [deleted] »

felixgallo wrote: post #355
evook wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Microsoft has comprehensively undone any progress they had here; windows 8 and beyond are a sludgy, slow, unresponsive mess owing in part to their incomprehensible reimplementation of much of the user shell in XAML.

[deleted]

Re: Bash on Ubuntu on Windows

#370

Post by Sanddancer »

pjc50 wrote: post #141
captainmuon wrote: post #87

I have to say after the initial excitement, I'm a bit disappointed about how this is implemented. Apparently, there is no or little interaction between the Linux world and the Windows world in this system. I don't see the benefits over running a classical Linux-as-a-process like coLinux, or something like Cygwin or MinGW. The option to run unmodified executables is nice if you have closed-source linux binaries, but t…

Mapping the processes across implies all sorts of strange things - what happens if you try to send a Linux signal to a Windows process? Mapping the users is possible and "SFU" did this, with a couple of caveats (Windows requires group and user names to be different, while UNIX systems often have groups with the same name as users). I don't think this is a Linux or GNOME killer, but it might put a dent in Cygwin and g…

Windows does have signals, just not nearly as many as Unixes, and are mostly built around how to kill a process. So I imagine all the non-terminate ones will be mapped to just be ignored.

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/xdkz3x12.aspx

Post reply on HN