Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

loss32.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 493 posts

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#341

Post by 201984 »

uecker wrote: post #251
goku12 wrote: post #90

Can somebody explain: 1. The exact problem with the Linux ABI 2. What causes it (the issues that makes it such a challenge) 3. How it changed over the years, and its current state 4. Any serious attempts to resolve it I've been on Linux for may be 2 decades at this point. I haven't noticed any issues with ABI so far, perhaps because I use everything from the distro repo or build and install them using the package man…

There is no ABI problem. The problem is a lack of standardization for important APIs and infrastructure. There once was a serious effort to solve this: the Linux Standard Base: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Standard_Base Standardization would of course be the only way to fix this, instead of inventing even more packaging formats which fragment the ecosystem even more. LSB died due to lack of interest. I assume…

Archive link for your CADT reference: https://archive.ph/t5m32

I wish websites weren't allowed to know what site a user is coming from.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#342

Post by apatheticonion »

HeckFeck wrote: post #270
steve1977 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And more performant. Software written for 2005 Windows runs super fast on todays systems.

Sometimes I install Office 97 for kicks and marvel at how much I can do with it, yet it asks so little of my system. <2Mb RAM for Word 97!

Same, I used to use Office 2003 because it was so quick and the UI was exactly what you needed.

On later versions they had animated cursor positions which felt slow, the spellcheck squiglies were lethargic and menus convoluted.

That said, I've given up and mostly use Google Docs/Sheets now because of the features and cross platform support.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#343

Post by apatheticonion »

+1

A 1:1 recreation of the Windows XP or Windows 7 user experience with the classic theme would be killer.

I say this with love, I have used KDE extensively and I still find it more janky than Windows XP. Gnome is "better" (especially since v40) in that it's consistent and has a few nicer utilities, but it also has worse UX (at least for power users) than Windows XP.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#344

Post by Klonoar »

layer8 wrote: post #262
cosmic_cheese wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It stuns me that a polished 1:1 2K/XP/7 clone DE (which it mimics is a setting) hasn’t existed for a 10y+ already. It’s such an obvious target for a mass appeal Linux desktop that many techies and non-techies alike would happily use. Rough approximations have been possible since the early 2000s, but they’re exactly that: rough approximations. Details matter, and when I boot up an old XP/7 box there are aspects in whi…

The problems with cloning the exact look is fear of copyright/IP issues with Microsoft. You can be pretty sure they won’t look away if such a desktop becomes really popular. Remember how Apple sued Samsung over using rounded corners on icons?

It is becoming obvious that some people didn't live through the Lindows era.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#345

Post by born-jre »

BirAdam wrote: post #123
senfiaj wrote: post #50

This might offend some people but even Linus Torvalds thinks that the ABI compatibility is not good enough in Linux distros, and this is one of the main reasons Linux is not popular on the desktop. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PmHRSeA2c8&t=283s

AppImage, theoretically, solves this problem (or FlatPak I guess). The issue would really be in getting people to package up dead/abandoned software.

Appimage maybe, don’t say flatpak Cz wherever I update my arch system flatpak gets broken which I have to fix by updating or reinstalling

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#346

Post by Imustaskforhelp »

generichuman wrote: post #294
Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At some point I've got to try this. I think it would be nice to have some tools to turn an existing programs into a zapps (there many such tools for making AppImages today). Looks like you met the right guy because I have built this tool :) Allow me to show my project, Appseed ( https://nanotimestamps.org/appseed ): It's a simple fish script which I had (prototyped with Claude) some 8-10 months ago I guess to solve…

Can you build GUI programs with this? I'm thinking anything that would depend on GPU drivers. Anything built with SDL, OpenGL, Vulkan, whatever.

No, in my experimentation I tried to convert OBS into static and it had the issue of it's gui not working. I am not exactly sure what's the reason but maybe you can check out another library like sdl etc. that you mention, I haven't tested out SDL,OpenGL etc's support to be honest but I think that maybe it might not work in the current stage or not (not sure), there is definitely a possibility of making it possible tho because CLI applications work just fine (IO and everything) so I am not really sure what caused my obs studio error but perhaps you can try it and then let me know if you need any help/share the results!

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#347

Post by Imustaskforhelp »

trelane wrote: post #297
Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sir, I am just saying that we can have linux (which works on almost all devices) and then we can have wine which I think is just a software layer so it should work on most hardware considering what it does is Wine translates Windows API calls into POSIX calls on-the-fly, these Posix calls would still be handled by the linux kernel and its support for its drivers. This is how loss32 works and I am just saying that sir…

It's cool. If we ever meet in person, I'll buy you a beer and we can discuss Linux. :)

Haha of course! (Although, I will never drink beer and never will, 1 I am still a minor lol and 2 I just dont really want to ever drink beer like ever) but I get the sentiment!

In beverages though, I just drink cole drink usually but in this time of the year, I'd rather froze to death if I did something like this (the cold is crazy out here) xD

But yea, there have been some instances where I talk about linux to people my age or maybe irl and its definitely frustrates that sometimes they don't understand it.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#348

Post by realusername »

robotnikman wrote: post #211
realusername wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure on Windows but with Wine you can totally use Win32 on arm.

Valve certainly seems to be making progress on it with Proton.

They are helping to use x86 apps on arm but if you wanted, you could already use windows arm apps on Linux arm without any problem.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#349

Post by tuna74 »

bruce511 wrote: post #165
realusername wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if it's the right solution but it's a description of what happens right now in practice yes.

It also makes support more or less impossible. Even if we ship as source, even if the user has the skills to build it, even if the make file supports every version of the kernel, plus all other material variety, plus who knows how many dependencies, what exactly am I supposed to do when a user reports; "I followed your instructions and it doesn't run". Linux Desktop fails because it's not 1 thing, it's 100 things. An…

Then you only support 1 distro. If anyone wants to use your software on an unsupported distro they can figure out the rest themselves.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#350

Post by tuna74 »

surajrmal wrote: post #205
RobotToaster wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the kernel responsible for the ABI?

ABI is a far larger concept than the kernel UAPI. Remember that the OS includes a lot of things in userspace as well. Many of these things are not even stable between the various contemporary Linux distros, let alone older versions of them. This might include dbus services, fs layout, window manager integration, and all sorts of other things.

Yeah, it is almost like that complete OS should be called something else than "Linux".
Post reply on HN