61–70 of 316 posts
A basic thing, but glad they updated console to support more colors and basic vt sequences. Currently I just have X11 server on startup and through some scripting have a shortcut to launch an xfce4-terminal instead of the native console.
My computer usage tends to be as a dumb terminal for SSH, and in that regard, I'm not having any trouble with WSL
The biggest problem I have with the WSL is that it is intrinsically tied to stable Windows releases; there is no way to get incremental updates for Bash on Windows unless you subscribe to the Windows Insider program, which is a way of running prerelease versions of Windows. So in order to get Linux features like inotify working you have to sacrifice the stability of your operating system. This looks like it'll be tru…
It is unfortunate that Microsoft couldn't figure out how to write this in a less kernel-attached way, but this is adding some powerful new functionality at many levels of the kernel, that will hopefully provide long-term benefits.
The Windows Subsystem for Linux felt incomplete to me the last time I tried it. I guess that is one of the advantages that macOS has in running Bash. macOS IS Unix, so Bash just fits, rather than being a bolted on service, the way it is in Windows. Hopefully things are much smoother now. It is certainly nice to see Windows finally get a good, cross-platform shell.
EDIT: Oops! It looks like Erlang 19 still isn't quite there...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Output from `bash --version` on macOS: `GNU bash, version 3.2.57(1)-release (x86_64-apple-darwin16) Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.` that's a 10yr old bash and there's barely any shell magic that you can do on Linux that won't work on macOS. And since by far most devs use macOS, most binaries support at least the macOS version of bash. All in all, no need to worry :p
You can get a newer bash, so that comparison is particularly moot.
A basic thing, but glad they updated console to support more colors and basic vt sequences. Currently I just have X11 server on startup and through some scripting have a shortcut to launch an xfce4-terminal instead of the native console.
I think "bash on Windows" is not a valid way of describing what it is. Cygwin, which allows you to run bash among many things, has been available for TWENTY TWO YEARS now. However it required such software to be ported and recompiled specifically for its use with Cygwin. The difference this time is being able to run unmodified Linux software on Windows, through an application binary interface called Windows Subsystem…
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2017/02/08/targeting...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What we need (last time I checked) is cron jobs and persistent services (sshd pls).
sshd works I guess. I can start sshd on WSL and connect to it using ssh from Visual Studio to build my C/C++ code on Linux using gcc. Maybe there are some others features of sshd you are talking about that I may not know about.
https://github.com/Microsoft/BashOnWindows/issues/1150
There are ways to hack around that but they're not pretty:
Newb question, does this "Winbash" run Linux/posix/unixy binaries that wouldn't otherwise run or does it assume the actual Windows dists/builds for (Elixir / Go / PostgreSQL / MySQL / GHC / etcpp)?
* Yes, these are native, ELF binaries. Yes, you can compile it on your linux server, cp it across to windows, and run it. * No, it is not an emulation. The win10 kernel + compatibility layer just happens to be able to also run ELF binaries. Yes, these show up as standard processes, and can be interacted with using normal windows tools (eg taskmgr).
In another twist to this, this dynamic then might 'incentivize' users of those packages to upgrade to 10 when they wouldn't have otherwise (or switch to Linux for good ;)
The biggest problem I have with the WSL is that it is intrinsically tied to stable Windows releases; there is no way to get incremental updates for Bash on Windows unless you subscribe to the Windows Insider program, which is a way of running prerelease versions of Windows. So in order to get Linux features like inotify working you have to sacrifice the stability of your operating system. This looks like it'll be tru…
I think you are being too harsh -- this is an in-development feature. Once it gets stable things should "just work", and you'll get an update in a few months, like most pieces of software. At the moment you wouldn't want to rely on the beta version for anything important -- some betas are fairly broken (as you would expect with betas). It is unfortunate that Microsoft couldn't figure out how to write this in a less k…
However, as a developer, I want a development environment that is stable and easy to setup. Windows has always been a huge mess to develop on and is the red headed step child as far as support for every open source project out there and the WSL implementation solves 90% of associated problems.
That being said... both MacOS and Linux are easier to code on. From compiling C extensions to file path parsing, UNIX-based operating systems have just turned out to be better development platforms. From my perspective, at least.
To emphasize, I have less of a problem with the work-in-progress nature of the project as I do with the release cycle. If the operating system stands in the way of getting work done, then the end user shouldn't have to face the dichotomy of whether or not to sacrifice core system stability in order to achieve his or her goals.