Now we only need a Windows-native Wayland server, which integrates seamlessly into the Windows desktop and of course just uses the Windows graphics stack.
Microsoft's Linux Kernel
321–330 of 532 posts
Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't know that macOS users don't run Docker natively! On Windows, it's native: https://docs.docker.com/docker-for-windows/
In practice, the vast majority of docker containers are Linux containers, so most uses of docker for windows need a Linux kernel to do anything useful. As such, the 'native' docker for windows you linked is actually managing a Linux VM (HyperV or VBox) fot you; the docker server runs on that VM, and the native docker windows binary simply connects to that server. They also do a lot of tricks to connect networking and…
docker for mac uses xhyve/hyperkit and has a really really slow i/o.
Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel
#323Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are a few annoyances with WSL2. For me the most important are: 1. You can't connect to a port listening on WSL localhost like in WSL1, you have to figure out the WSL IP address and use that. 2. From WSL you can't connect to a Windows TCP port on localhost, you must figure out the Windows IP (cat /etc/resolv.conf) and use that. 3. The WSL remote interpreter on PyCharm is not working anymore. The suggested workar…
> you must figure out the Windows IP The existence of c:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts cracks me up. Supposedly [citation needed] Windows uses/used part of the BSD network stack.
Ahhh, the eternel dilemna they face. Either recreate the wheel and get complaints about that, or re-use the wheel and have people "crack up" about you doing that.
Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel
#324What's the bet that MacOS will switch to the Linux kernel within the next five years?
It's as likely as Google switching to the NT kernel for Andorid
Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel
#325Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
There's more than one Android userspace. https://github.com/termux/termux-packages/tree/master/packag...
Which isn't fully POSIX, breaks down with every Android release that clamps down security, and most of it is just plain ISO C, ISO C++ and OpenGL, hardly Linux specific.
Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, except in this case is just one goalpost and everyone wins. Now we can enjoy using software as MS Office and userland from Linux distros in the same machine seamlessly.
This is the "embrace" phase. It also kind of encompasses "extend" by adding hardware support via Windows drivers. This alone is not enough to get to "extinguish" though, so allow me to make a prediction. The next step is fully locked down hardware that requires a signed OS. Linux will not run on it, but MS will pretend to support you by allowing linux apps to run on their kernel. Then, once no hardware will allow you…
Exactly this. I still remember M$ playing rough in the browser game. Bad actors never change. You can purge "bad apples" again and again, change masks, pretend to be fluffy and lovable, but you're still same old evil co. We remember. We see you snooping. We see you seething with hate for FOSS underneath your let's opensource .net core mask.
And I, personally, will never forgive M$ for Elopcalypse, burning platform and death of nokia.
Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel
#327Microsoft: 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…
It did release a POSIX layer. Not many people used it.
Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel
#328would this have been at all possible if linux had been GPLv3?
No.
Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel
#329Earlier quoted context omitted.
One more: OEMs like Dell and HP aren't allowed (by Microsoft) to sell PCs that dual-boot between Windows and something else, such as GNU/Linux so the only people that get to try Linux are those that have it pre-installed as the only OS, or those willing and able to install it themselves. Source: read about it somewhere or other; main topic was the history of BeOS.
This (the OEM deals) is really by far the biggest problem that Linux has on the desktop. Microsoft still plays dirty and has done that for a long time.
Why? As far as I am concerned these are all legacy problems. Drivers mostly work, people are aware of Linux and it can be e.g. run off an external drive. The problem is desktop Linux just isn't good enough. From a macro perspective it takes significant effort to manage, significant effort to develop for and provides significantly less value to users, developers and organizations alike. And exceptions doesn't make that less true. There is no conspiracy against Linux, or at least not an effective one. If there is anything hurting Linux it is its mainstream proponents like Google, who like to take but not give back agency. If desktop Linux was good enough, or more precisely great at what people need, they would be using it.