Live data from Hacker News

BSD on Windows: Things I wish I knew existed

virtuallyfun.com

101–110 of 115 posts

Re: BSD on Windows: Things I wish I knew existed

#101
post #41

Windows NT 3.x and 4 were Posix complaint. In the mid-1990's there were a few vendors that sold products that let you run full X11 apps on NT. Microsoft bought and extinguished the largest one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interix

I guess WSL/WSL2 is Microsoft's mea culpa . :D

Definitely.

Re: BSD on Windows: Things I wish I knew existed

#102
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even on the source level, there are certain limitations to POSIX, e.g. linux uses epoll() which is more performant than poll(), but isn't defined by POSIX. So application writes sometimes have to choose between making code more portable or making it more performant.

Anyone know why we can't get a new POSIX with some epoll/kqueue equivalent, maybe baking in some of the lessons learned from epoll's interface? It's insane in 2023 that people are typing things like EPOLL_ONESHOT and it's actually the best option.

Linux wars replaced UNIX wars, and POSIX moves slow.

Re: BSD on Windows: Things I wish I knew existed

#103
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is relevant to my interests. What roadblocks did you run into when you attempted to build statically? I assume your goal was to have a single binary of Love2D so you can swap it around and not worry about glibc version? (As God intended imo; not religious but games should be one contained thing imo) Am curious to see what it does to avoid a static build.

The love2d static build story was a tangent to my 2016 challenge to ship one game every month of the year. The tangent ended up delaying the March game indefinitely, and thus ending the challenge... My memory is a bit hazy, so apologies for the scarce/imprecise details. I really, really wanted to ship binary builds for the three major platforms: Windows, Mac, and Linux; so that my friends and strangers could actually…

I was recently surprised that CGO only works on Windows with a msys2 compiler, while everyone else works just fine with Visual C++, or VS provided clang.

Re: BSD on Windows: Things I wish I knew existed

#104
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The kernel, I've been told by people more knowledgeable about this things than myself, is a work of beauty. But the layers and layers of Win32 that sit on top of it do a great job of covering that up.

Well, the benchmarks don't tell that.

You know what they say about benchmarks... ;-)

I prefer Linux, but performance is not my main grief about Windows.

Re: BSD on Windows: Things I wish I knew existed

#105
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is relevant to my interests. What roadblocks did you run into when you attempted to build statically? I assume your goal was to have a single binary of Love2D so you can swap it around and not worry about glibc version? (As God intended imo; not religious but games should be one contained thing imo) Am curious to see what it does to avoid a static build.

The love2d static build story was a tangent to my 2016 challenge to ship one game every month of the year. The tangent ended up delaying the March game indefinitely, and thus ending the challenge... My memory is a bit hazy, so apologies for the scarce/imprecise details. I really, really wanted to ship binary builds for the three major platforms: Windows, Mac, and Linux; so that my friends and strangers could actually…

Just ship the .so files? It's what most commercial software and things like Firefox do. Just run it via a wrapper that sets LD_PRELOAD.

Re: BSD on Windows: Things I wish I knew existed

#106
post #77

Not sure that NT kernel is inferior to UNIX/POSIX. It was by David Cutler modelled after VMS, which was state of the art at one point.

The kernel, I've been told by people more knowledgeable about this things than myself, is a work of beauty. But the layers and layers of Win32 that sit on top of it do a great job of covering that up.

I fail to see what is particularly brillant about this kernel. Drivers are convoluted. IRQL is convoluted. The supposed distniction between "kernel" and executive has little definition and is convoluted (esp given it duplicates somes primitives for no real reasons). The HAL was a false good idea and Cultler himself agree with that. The network stack splitted betwen user and kernel space makes no sense (and the story behind this, including afd.sys, is ridiculous)

It's a not great / not terrible kernel, like most are (Linux included)

Re: BSD on Windows: Things I wish I knew existed

#108
post #33

“OS/2 is the dominant workstation product” In what universe other than maybe some banks was that the case? 1995 was the era of the commercial UNIX workstation.

Likely also referenced by Microsoft whenever antitrust came around for a cup of tea and a bit of a dance.

Re: BSD on Windows: Things I wish I knew existed

#109
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

During university days, had NT really properly supported POSIX, I probably would never bothered with that "Linux Unleashed with Slackware 2.0 CD-ROM" book. If Microsoft could tell the future, they would have improved POSIX, instead of killing it, and then briging a Linux VM into the OS.

Microsoft did everything, like everything and more, to kill every alternative platform on the planet. Hedging their bets with half-hearted posix support was part of that effort. If not for that MSN vs Internet fiasco, they would succeed.

Nah, in those days everyone was either offering POSIX.1 support or even providing their own custom Unix distribution for their machines, because it was the only way to get US government contracts. This is why things like Amix, Atari UNIX, and A/UX existed at all, and why NT had to have an out-of-box POSIX subsystem.

Re: BSD on Windows: Things I wish I knew existed

#110
post #106
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The kernel, I've been told by people more knowledgeable about this things than myself, is a work of beauty. But the layers and layers of Win32 that sit on top of it do a great job of covering that up.

I fail to see what is particularly brillant about this kernel. Drivers are convoluted. IRQL is convoluted. The supposed distniction between "kernel" and executive has little definition and is convoluted (esp given it duplicates somes primitives for no real reasons). The HAL was a false good idea and Cultler himself agree with that. The network stack splitted betwen user and kernel space makes no sense (and the story…

I rely entirely on hearsay. You sound like you know more about the NT kernel's internals than I do, so I'll take your word for it.
Post reply on HN