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

501–510 of 532 posts

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#501

Post by pault »

scardine wrote: post #114
ChuckMcM wrote: post #51

Well that is pretty nice. WSL gets that much more exactly like Linux. What I really appreciate about WSL is that you get the accessibility of a bunch of OSS projects and a machine which has legit drivers for all of its component bits. What this means to me is that searching for a "linux laptop" won't be a chore, if it runs the latest Windows it will run Linux. And I can do development on the Linux side while communic…

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…

I know you probably don't want to give up your editor, but FWIW if you can find an acceptable collection of bindings and python extensions for VSCode the remote development extensions work amazingly well with WSL. I was able to set up a full haskell IDE using haskero in under ten minutes with zero configuration.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#502

Post by namibj »

majewsky wrote: post #462
gambiting wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just more offended that the default behaviour on an extremely popular distro is failed boot = brick. You don't even get a basic command prompt to fix something, the default behavior is to lock everything down and forbid access, making it impossible to repair the machine from itself. Windows will reboot a few times and then automatically start in safe mode when this happens, you don't need to extract the drive to…

FWIW, you're using the word "brick" incorrectly. Bricking is when the only fix is to throw the device away and buy a new one, which clearly is not the case here.

Distinguish Hard Brick and Soft Brick.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#503

Post by __d »

cameronbrown wrote: post #243
meruru wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't need NT to have competing kernels. All of the following have their own kernels: + FreeBSD + OpenBSD + NetBSD + DragonFlyBSD + Minix + Haiku + Redox + Plan 9 + SeL4 + Fuchsia And many more.

Dozens and dozens of UNIX kernels (with Fuchsia being the exception I believe..? Not sure). Yes I know kernels have far outgrown POSIX, but it's still a form of monoculture. Diversity in all dimensions matters imo.

Not to disagree with your point, but Plan9 is not really a Unix kernel, despite being written by some of the same group at Bell Labs.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#504

Post by MuffinFlavored »

xfer wrote: post #31
MuffinFlavored wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How? Wouldn't it be the year of the "Microsoft emulating Linux behind the scenes" desktop, aka still Microsoft windows?

Emualting? Literally shipping a kernel and distro with their OS..

What's the GUI going to run? X.org? Wayland? Or in the Windows ecosystem?...

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#505

Post by bscphil »

ex3xu wrote: post #445
delusional wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In fairness I would say that I've spent just as much or more time fixing rolling release issues on Arch/Manjaro. That doesn't even matter much to me. Obviously, less time spent is better, but what really matters is the timing. When I have to spend time upgrading my linux box, I have set time aside. I decide that I have a bit of time, and if it turns out to be a bigger job than expected, I can decide to abort and co…

> Obviously, less time spent is better, but what really matters is the timing... On Windows the upgrade is always inconvenient, because you have no way of controlling it. True, very good point in favor of user control. Linux has the added benefit of teaching the discipline and foresight to understand that "Hey... maybe I shouldn't run sudo pacman -Syu and reboot until I have some time set aside". Though in recent yea…

> Though in recent years I've found Arch to be way more stable with very few updates causing major problems.

Can confirm. I've had the same Arch install for nearly 6 years now. I've borked it only once in that time, and that one was my fault for not reading the news first. Fixed it in And I've made considerable changes in that time, including moving the entire installation from one hard disk to another.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#506

Post by ex3xu »

dredmorbius wrote: post #500
ex3xu wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With great power comes great responsibility, I guess. I agree it would have been nice for Linux to come with a few more sanity checks by default, like maybe a warning flag for rm -rf /* and dd commands...

Standard rm (coreutils) has included rootfs protections since at least 2012: --no-preserve-root do not treat '/' specially --preserve-root do not remove '/' (default) https://manpages.debian.org/stretch/coreutils/rm.1.en.html Mind that if your rm comes from elsewhere (say, Busybox), it may not have that protection. Very careful use of rm as root is an excellent habit to cultivate. As are backups.

Interesting, I didn't know that and I stand corrected.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#507

Post by cacarr »

mamcx wrote: post #123
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 have think the same but maybe TODAY is not as hard as before: 1- We have 4/5 mainstream OSes today: Win/OSX/iOS/Android + Linux. In the case of iOS/android: Some users alread switch between the 2. 2- If it have apps is almost all people need. Drivers are not THAT significant IMHO. 3- Chromebook is a thing, despite it sound stupid: A OS that is just a browser. Web is the 6 truly mainstream "OS". 4- What people need…

> 3- Chromebook is a thing, despite it sound stupid: A OS that is just a browser.

It's not really "just a browser" these days. Runs Android apps, and regular old GNU/Linux desktop apps.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#508

Post by anticensor »

withinrafael wrote: post #208
kyriakos wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In practice it's not really working though. At least not yet. There's a very long thread on virtualbox forums with people trying to get it to work but failing. I personally have to reboot when I need to use docker or virtualbox. Very annoying.

Yep, this is currently confirmed broken on Windows 10 1903 (Windows Hypervisor Platform extended user-mode APIs). Affects VirtualBox, qemu, etc. We may see a patch, but it's up in the air right now. ( , I know.)

Qemu? Qemu does processor emulation AFAIK.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#509

Post by Dylan16807 »

dredmorbius wrote: post #500
ex3xu wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With great power comes great responsibility, I guess. I agree it would have been nice for Linux to come with a few more sanity checks by default, like maybe a warning flag for rm -rf /* and dd commands...

Standard rm (coreutils) has included rootfs protections since at least 2012: --no-preserve-root do not treat '/' specially --preserve-root do not remove '/' (default) https://manpages.debian.org/stretch/coreutils/rm.1.en.html Mind that if your rm comes from elsewhere (say, Busybox), it may not have that protection. Very careful use of rm as root is an excellent habit to cultivate. As are backups.

What about it? I don't think that does anything for "/*"

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#510

Post by zaarn »

mtzet wrote: post #265

This is really Microsoft catching up to the Mac in terms of integration with the open-source ecosystem which importantly drives the web. In the mid 2000's the Mac really took off due to being a good-enough Linux replacement on the command line, while taking care of all the hardware integration and providing a sleek desktop experience. This really helped the Mac take off among hackers. This system wasn't as open-sourc…

The Linux Kernel can free memory; the balloon driver included in all kernels allows it to dynamically shrink and grow memory with a variety of urgency levels and the kernel can (optionally) shrink memory itself once it's not needed based on various parameters. It's fairly reliable and works well.
Post reply on HN