A Look into CBL-Mariner, Microsoft’s Internal Linux Distribution
1–10 of 123 posts
Re: A Look into CBL-Mariner, Microsoft’s Internal Linux Distribution
#2Does Mariner include SELinux? If not, what major LSMs are supported? Thanks!
Re: A Look into CBL-Mariner, Microsoft’s Internal Linux Distribution
#3Does Mariner include SELinux? If not, what major LSMs are supported? Thanks!
It's not mentioned on their security features page[1].
[1] https://github.com/microsoft/CBL-Mariner/blob/1.0/toolkit/do...
Re: A Look into CBL-Mariner, Microsoft’s Internal Linux Distribution
#4It seems almost inevitable that Windows will eventually become a Linux distro. Microsoft could replace incredibly resilient cruft like NTFS with EXT4 or ZFS and the registry with human readable configuration files. On the other hand, they could replace Bash with PowerShell and hopefully pressure various orgs to adopt some sensible subset of configuration formats.
Re: A Look into CBL-Mariner, Microsoft’s Internal Linux Distribution
#5It seems almost inevitable that Windows will eventually become a Linux distro. Microsoft could replace incredibly resilient cruft like NTFS with EXT4 or ZFS and the registry with human readable configuration files. On the other hand, they could replace Bash with PowerShell and hopefully pressure various orgs to adopt some sensible subset of configuration formats.
I love the idea of windows registry though, I hope it stays. With linux, i have to to poke around the file system or google "package X config location" and many programs have their own idiosyncratic rules around which config paths take precedence over others. Windows registry as implemented is not the best, but the idea of something like a central sqlite db for config is great.
Re: A Look into CBL-Mariner, Microsoft’s Internal Linux Distribution
#6It seems almost inevitable that Windows will eventually become a Linux distro. Microsoft could replace incredibly resilient cruft like NTFS with EXT4 or ZFS and the registry with human readable configuration files. On the other hand, they could replace Bash with PowerShell and hopefully pressure various orgs to adopt some sensible subset of configuration formats.
I'm not so sure. Windows driver model is vastly different than Linux. Linux drivers have to be compiled for every kernel release. Windows drivers that are more than a decade old can still be installed and work correctly.
Re: A Look into CBL-Mariner, Microsoft’s Internal Linux Distribution
#7It seems almost inevitable that Windows will eventually become a Linux distro. Microsoft could replace incredibly resilient cruft like NTFS with EXT4 or ZFS and the registry with human readable configuration files. On the other hand, they could replace Bash with PowerShell and hopefully pressure various orgs to adopt some sensible subset of configuration formats.
I'm not so sure. Windows driver model is vastly different than Linux. Linux drivers have to be compiled for every kernel release. Windows drivers that are more than a decade old can still be installed and work correctly.
DKMS and driver segmentation enables 10 year old drivers to mostly still work on Linux too.
Re: A Look into CBL-Mariner, Microsoft’s Internal Linux Distribution
#8How is this licensed under MIT and not GPL if it's a distro built on existing Linux code that's GPL-ed?
Re: A Look into CBL-Mariner, Microsoft’s Internal Linux Distribution
#9It seems almost inevitable that Windows will eventually become a Linux distro. Microsoft could replace incredibly resilient cruft like NTFS with EXT4 or ZFS and the registry with human readable configuration files. On the other hand, they could replace Bash with PowerShell and hopefully pressure various orgs to adopt some sensible subset of configuration formats.
> replace Bash with PowerShell
On the contrary I wish Windows shipped with busybox, so that it would be easier to run scripts with some bashisms portably.
Re: A Look into CBL-Mariner, Microsoft’s Internal Linux Distribution
#10It seems almost inevitable that Windows will eventually become a Linux distro. Microsoft could replace incredibly resilient cruft like NTFS with EXT4 or ZFS and the registry with human readable configuration files. On the other hand, they could replace Bash with PowerShell and hopefully pressure various orgs to adopt some sensible subset of configuration formats.
I understand a lot of the benefits of ZFS and Powershell. But whats wrong with NTFS? Can you talk a little about the relative strengths of NTFS vs EXT4?