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

271–280 of 532 posts

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#271

Post by qplex »

mkesper wrote: post #256
paranoidrobot wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What this ignores is that Linux driver support is generally fantastic, works out of the box in a way that desktop architects at MS dream about and is infinitely more current in practice since you go to one place to update all your software, including driver software, something MS hasn't been able to get right in a decade of trying. Generally, yes, it's pretty decent on first go and there's a nice default happy path…

Linux driver support is fantastic because it's not made by manufacturers.

This is not correct.

Many manufacturers contribute drivers to the kernel.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#272

Post by tjoff »

Operyl wrote: post #108
marsrover wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it uses Hyper-V does this mean there will be issues using VirtualBox if WSL 2 is enabled?

As of VirtualBox 6.0, they should be able to coexist (because VirtualBox piggies onto Hyper-V when it’s enabled effectively).

But then it is really Hyper-V with a VirtualBox UI. Seems like a recipe for incompatibilities etc.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#273

Post by londons_explore »

kumarharsh wrote: post #210
anthony_doan wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 wil…

On Reddit, they had a benchmark for WSL1 vs WSL2 and it showed that the Single core perf of WSL2 was sometimes better than Windows (and even bare metal linux - how that happened I am not sure). The multi-core was not as good, but still better than WSL1. I can't find that exact thread right now, but here's another one comparing WSL with Windows: https://www.reddit.com/r/bashonubuntuonwindows/comments/c1r6...

I bet the windows hardware drivers for initialising caches, memory busses, power states, cooling etc. set certain systems up for slightly better performance.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#274

Post by rsrx »

This is truly amazing. I have always developed on Windows and recently got a new contract where whole development environment is based on OSX/Linux. It has saved me hours and hours of work (and $$$) since I can run their environment in subsystem, while keeping Windows interface. Thank you, Nadella.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#275

Post by pjmlp »

dehrmann wrote: post #237
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…

While people nitpick over what "linux desktop" means, don't lose sight of the fact that general purpose computing is slowly dying and being replaced by iOS and Android. Roughly as many iPhones are sold per year as desktops and laptops combined.

iOS doesn't use Linux and on Android userspace doesn't actually see it.

https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides/stable_apis

So it is meaningless.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#277

Post by qplex »

kop316 wrote: post #40
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…

I was like you when I read that. I remember when Ballmer called Linux cancer: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/06/02/ballmer_linux_is_a_...

I'm pretty sure that Microsoft (and Ballmer) still consider Linux a cancer.

It's just progressed very far, and their latest moves are only desperate efforts to "embrace the cancer" before it completely consumes the market.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#279

Post by vbezhenar »

ComodoHacker wrote: post #246
vbezhenar wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Installing Linux in VirtualBox is not hard. If anything, it's extremely easy. Microsoft does not bring anything substantial, you could use Linux in VirtualBox since forever and they just bundle it in their OS. Windows just getting worse and worse. I was amazed when they decided to develop Linux syscall layer, but now it's just extremely lazy approach. Hey, guys, we don't have enough money to build proper Linux layer,…

>Microsoft does not bring anything substantial Microsoft brings integration not possible in VM. You can actually make Linux tools part of your complex heterogeneous workflow.

Can you tell me more or provide a link where I can read about it? I know that WSL1 indeed provided that level of integration, when you can launch Linux binary from Windows program or vice versa, because they are actually executing on the same Windows kernel, when files are actually on the same NTFS file system. That is truly amazing integration.

How is their WSL2 integration is different from something like shared folders?

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#280

Post by vbezhenar »

lawik wrote: post #258
vbezhenar wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Installing Linux in VirtualBox is not hard. If anything, it's extremely easy. Microsoft does not bring anything substantial, you could use Linux in VirtualBox since forever and they just bundle it in their OS. Windows just getting worse and worse. I was amazed when they decided to develop Linux syscall layer, but now it's just extremely lazy approach. Hey, guys, we don't have enough money to build proper Linux layer,…

From what I've heard the change from the layer approach to the virtual linux was mostly related to file system performance. Does it have to be innovative if it offers better integration than VirtualBox? Or is it reasonable that they use well-known and working tech? Also, while I think it is useful. I imagine much of the hype here is also from the weirdness of it all. Would you agree that it is noteworthy that Microso…

If there's not enough file system performance, they should improve their file system layer. It'll benefit all Windows applications as a side-effect. Believe it or not, but people actually use Git with Windows :) If Linux is able to pull much better file system performance, I don't believe that it's just impossible for Windows to achieve similar levels. I think that Microsoft sent many patches to Linux kernel before. It might look weird, but it's nothing really new. Their Azure business uses Linux.
Post reply on HN