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

Microsoft's Linux Kernel

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 532 posts

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#71

Post by anthony_doan »

filmgirlcw wrote: post #42
mullingitover wrote: post #10

I wish Microsoft would release their own linux-based OS with a compatibility layer to let me run Windows apps. I'm not overly impressed with the direction Apple is going but I really enjoy a *nix-native environment too much to go back to vanilla Windows. It would change the math a lot for me if it was full-blown linux under the hood.

Disclosure: I work at Microsoft but not on Windows (and my work machine is a MacBook Pro FWIW) WSL 2 is a lot like that -- it's a VM in the sense that it uses Hyper-V, but it's super lightweight. And in fact, when WSL 2 is enabled, both Windows AND Linux are running in the same type of VM (separate, obviously), so it's near-native performance in a lot of ways. There are still some I/O issues that the team is actively…

> There are still some I/O issues that the team is actively working on, but early benchmarks are quite promising.

=/

Hoping to run my R code on WSL 2. Glad I got the answer. I wish you guys well on I/O issues.

Is there any performance hit for WSL2 in regard to process forking? I recall that how window and unix deal with process is different (my R code uses mclapply parallel package for unix). I'm curious if there will be any performance hit that stands out versus running on a unix system for parallel/concurrency code.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#72

Post by bshacklett »

antirez wrote: post #52

Microsoft: put a good POSIX layer into Windows. The times are mature now, and this allows your platform to benefit from a lot of open source system software easily, without portings and compatibility layers. At the same time, now that developers start to be annoyed big time by Apple nonsensical Mac handling, this gives a lot of devs, not developing primarily for the Win arch, the ability to evaluate Windows as a deve…

The pure geek in me really wishes they'd bring back SFU. Windows has a really impressive mechanism for implementing subsystems (I can't remember for sure, but I believe win32 is actually implemented on top of this layer).

I'm sure there's far more complexity involved than I could imagine, but I've always loved the idea of having a bunch of different subsystems running without the need for virtualization.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#73

Post by freehunter »

Thaxll wrote: post #55
bitlax wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What has Microsoft extinguished lately?

Edge. Couple of years ago I was really pissed how they fucked up the merge between Hotmail and Skype, I lost so many "friends" because they killed MSN / hotmail.

Microsoft first licensed Internet Explorer in 1994. It's most used engine Trident was released in 1997. IE/Edge was discontinued in 2019. That's one hell of an "Embrace Extend Extingush" cycle.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#74

Post by mixmastamyk »

jdoliner wrote: post #6

My brain threw an exception when I read this title. Awesome that this is a reality though. Now that we have a Linux kernels running and accessible on both Windows and Chromebooks I feel like we can finally say: 2019 actually is the year of Linux on the desktop. It's not a meme anymore, it's finally just a true statement. Edit: To those questioning if this really counts as Linux on the Desktop. Yes, I understand what…

Yes, it’s a gateway drug, like firefox and libreoffice.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#75

Post by cameronbrown »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #65
cameronbrown wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably an unpopular opinion but.. there is a lot of value in having multiple competing kernels. In the same vein as browser engines, any monoculture is a bad idea. Not to mention there's been a lot of good work done on the NT kernel itself. Under the hood it's pretty advanced, even with all the user-space cruft on top.

Sadly, much like with the web, things have evolved such that it is virtually impossible to create a competitor due to all the accumulated complexity. The driver problem on the PC platform is pretty much insurmountable at this point, so any competitor would have to begin life, and gain massively in popularity somehow, on a much less flexible hardware platform. It's a shame and makes me sad for modern computing.

I wouldn't be so cynical. As with all things, tech comes and goes in cycles. I think with the limit to Moore's law rapidly approaching for current silicon, there's a good chance that efficiency & simplicity will become front and centre again at some point.

Not sure if this will mean new architectures, operating systems & better tools.. but one can dream!

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#77

Post by gfiorav »

I already use WSL1 as my main setup for web dev at work. If Windows comes to a point where doing anything doesn't immediately make the fan spin to maximum RPM, I'll be very happy to call Windows my digital home.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#78

Post by creativeCak3 »

linguae wrote: post #54
cobalt wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so microsoft's open source linux kernel is going to cause everyone to stop using linux...?

No, not everyone is going to abandon Linux; I'm going to define Linux in this context as the traditional Linux desktop where people run some sort of X11 or Wayland window manager or desktop environment on top of a Linux kernel running on bare hardware. However, it would be interesting to see what impact the popularity of WSL will have on Linux desktop environments such as KDE, GNOME and its derivatives MATE and Cinna…

What you just said is such a realistic analysis and terrifying....I will keep on running linux on bare metal hardware no matter what. I like to know what is ACTUALLY happening inside an OS,not being told by a company what is SUPPOSEDLY happening.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#79

Post by dralley »

viraptor wrote: post #43
dralley wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Overused meme is overused. Please explain to me how EEE can be applied to GPLv2 code.

It can be pretty easily applied to GPLv2 in commercial agreement. "You get the source under GPL and all the rights, but if you publish anything, you're dead to us and you need our product". This is what grsecurity does with Linux kernel, but the extinguish part is not in their interest.

This post is literally a link to the source code published on Github, and the commits aren't obfuscated either.
Post reply on HN