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

511–520 of 532 posts

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#511

Post by tracker1 »

sterlind wrote: post #492
ryl00 wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I understand (which is very, very little!), fundamental NT vs Linux architecture differences wrt their respective file systems prevent much more performance improvement in WSL 1.x.

They do, but NT file performance over many files scales abysmally. The two major reasons are a legacy of bad decisions: deleting files is forbidden if there are open write handles, and filter drivers are allowed to be placed between other drivers in the file I/O stack. There's not much Windows can do about this, which causes tons of issues with e.g. git clone. Erick Smith is ludicrously smart, he just couldn't squeez…

I wouldn't say bad decisions so much as different decisions. Given WSL would abstract out file system access anyway, why didn't they just bridge WSL's FS similarly to how they did with WSL2 anyway? Though, I'm not sure there's much advantage left at that point.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#512

Post by Dylan16807 »

butterisgood wrote: post #418
_emacsomancer_ wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like 'linux'?

Sure, but if I worked at Microsoft there might be guidelines on the use of the company name. I doubt it’s worth reading into as some nefarious situation.

The complaint is that it's gaudy, not "nefarious".

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#513

Post by tracker1 »

trollied wrote: post #435
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…

> I find it fairly easy to work on both Mac OS X, Linux and WSL2 -- but not pre-WSL Windows. Cygwin really helped me with the Windows part of that for many years. I switched to a Powerbook about a year before the Intel switch & haven't looked back since. Linux has never been a good enough desktop all-rounder to make me switch to it as a desktop OS. Maybe I should take another look.

I'm planning a desktop upgrade (now sometime later this year), eyeing an r7-3950x or next gen threadripper. I'll probably go Linux as my primary desktop again, and VM for windows and macos as needed. I feel it's there enough at this point. Probably been 5-6 years since I've tried it as my primary OS. Though I did keep my grandmother on Ubuntu for about a decade before she passed (her old game ran under wine, and no worries about windows viruses/scams).

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#514

Post by tracker1 »

op00to wrote: post #456
scardine wrote: post #114

Earlier 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…

4. At least VMWare Workstation is broken when you're using WSL 2. That's pretty annoying.

Has VMWare Workstation ever worked with Hyper-V enabled?

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#515

Post by neop1x »

gambiting wrote: post #417
ex3xu wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The thing that annoys me most on Windows is Windows itself. After using Linuxes for almost two decades now, the notion of the OS taking tens of minutes to self update when all I wanted was to quickly reboot it is unbearable. This is definitely a problem especially considering that the shotgun approach to some Windows updates actually hurt the performance of some machines, even breaking Windows on occasion [0]. Howe…

So after a very long hiatus I have decided to try installing linux on a raspberry pi - and wow, the results were amazing. Using my decade-old knowledge of using fstab I added some drives to /etc/fstab and rebooted. Oooops. Raspbian would fail boot with a message "root account locked, couldn't open console". Fantastic - so if any of the fstab entries are missing, the entire system effectively bricks itself. The only w…

You probably haven't tried changing windows partition and messing with Windows bootloader's registry file...

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#516

Post by pjmlp »

cacarr wrote: post #507
mamcx wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Only on some selected devices.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#517

Post by pjmlp »

cookiecaper wrote: post #313
underwater wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? This is a common ask, but what exactly makes a Linux kernel superior to Windows? There seems to be an assumption that Linux is the ultimate in OSes. But most of the value comes from the large ecosystem and momentum, rather than specific technical advantages.

In the post-SGI, pre-Second-Jobsian-Revolution world of the the mid-late 90s, there was a real malaise in workstation computing. The systems were dumbed down, the hardware was homogenized and commoditized into joyless beige, an ocean of "Try AOL Free for 100 days" CDs jostled and slushed amidst the flickering fluorescence of the cube farm, where CRTs and overhead lights would never quite hum along at the same frequen…

This is about UNIX clones being offered for $0.

No one can fight against free beer, regardless how bad it might taste, people still go for it.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#518

Post by tempodox »

They still don't have a terminal application that deserves the name. The crap they built into the Ubuntu app is still the same torturous parody that's used in the DOS cmd interpreter. Even Cygwin has a much better terminal than that.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#519

Post by CameronNemo »

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.

Less than half of those kernels are derived from UNIX. Do they replicate the same interfaces? Sure. But so does NT.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#520

Post by figgis »

tempodox wrote: post #518

They still don't have a terminal application that deserves the name. The crap they built into the Ubuntu app is still the same torturous parody that's used in the DOS cmd interpreter. Even Cygwin has a much better terminal than that.

https://github.com/microsoft/Terminal
Post reply on HN