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

Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

lists.zx2c4.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 392 posts

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#351

Post by Klonoar »

formerly_proven wrote: post #34
dcow wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love Jason’s response and think it carries the right tone and is delivered near flawlessly. It’s clearly frustrating to deal with Apple’s platform lockdown, and he captures such in a professional and rational manner. Bravo. What bothers me is that I’ve experienced an increasing number of maintainers of supposed cross platform projects simply not care about macOS anymore to the extent that they’re openly hostile tow…

FWIW in the projects I've involved in we do get macOS-specific requests and reports from time to time but I have yet to see a macOS dev step up and contribute. There is lots of cross-platform software, which works on Linux, Windows and even BSDs; you can't expect (or feel entitled for) open source maintainers to then also go ahead and buy expensive Apple hardware just to support their idiosyncratic almost-BSD-but-not…

One thing I've noticed, as someone who's helped out on the macOS side of things for an open source project or two, is that the Mac/AppKit/Cocoa documentation issue is a barrier here.

There are absolutely OSS maintainers who wouldn't mind patching things for macOS... if they could figure out the expected behavior/etc. I've fixed things for projects that I only know about from plumbing around in AppKit for a few years now.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#352

Post by WorldMaker »

searchableguy wrote: post #345
turtlebits wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not used a current version WSL, but it was terrible when I tried it. Could not find files saved in the WSL terminal in explorer (I understand that is a limitation). The was so much unknown going on in the "integration" that I wished I just used a VM and took the perf hit instead of digging to figure out where Windows was mounting the FS and figuring out permissions. I have no desire to look at WSL ever again.…

> Could not find files saved in the WSL terminal in explorer (I understand that is a limitation). The was so much unknown going on in the "integration" that I wished I just used a VM and took the perf hit instead of digging to figure out where Windows was mounting the FS and figuring out permissions. You can explore the files stored inside wsl partition by going to \\wsl$ using file manager. You can now also mount an…

In very recent versions of Windows 10 WSL will even add directly to File Explorer a shortcut in the usual Locations pane (left-hand panel with quick folders/PC/whatnot) to \\wsl$ with a Tux icon. It's amusing seeing Tux every time you open File Explorer, and possibly even more amusing that Microsoft is installing that shortcut themselves.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#353

Post by _ea1k »

wlesieutre wrote: post #200
_ea1k wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When they change that optional setting they introduced recently What setting was introduced recently? I remember such settings all the way back to the Nexus One. In fact, things were more closed back then as Android phones bought from AT&T had it hard coded to disable third party apps. I'm not aware of a US carrier doing that any more.

Might be talking about their "Advanced Protection Program": https://landing.google.com/advancedprotection/

I could be mistaken, but I'm not seeing a connection between that and third party app support.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#354

Post by wlesieutre »

_ea1k wrote: post #353
wlesieutre wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Might be talking about their "Advanced Protection Program": https://landing.google.com/advancedprotection/

I could be mistaken, but I'm not seeing a connection between that and third party app support.

> On your Android phone, only app installations from verified stores, like the Google Play Store and your device manufacturer’s app store, are allowed.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#355

Post by roblabla »

turtlebits wrote: post #305
fluidcruft wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience is that Windows Subsystem for Linux has been amazing on Windows and just keeps getting better. I've also never noticed any difference in spinning up VMs. But anyway I get keeping with familiar tools but, I just disagree that MacOS is a better or even "sane" terminal platform. All the ancient GNU tools Mac ships and BSD-style "but Posix!" pedantry drives me up the wall.

I have not used a current version WSL, but it was terrible when I tried it. Could not find files saved in the WSL terminal in explorer (I understand that is a limitation). The was so much unknown going on in the "integration" that I wished I just used a VM and took the perf hit instead of digging to figure out where Windows was mounting the FS and figuring out permissions. I have no desire to look at WSL ever again.…

You can literally just run 'explorer.exe .' in a wsl1 shell to get an explorer to show up in whatever directory you are currently in. The wsl files are not hidden from windows, and can be edited from there just fine.

F# (and most of Dotnet core) is also a mess on linux, so no surprises here.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#356

Post by [deleted] »

WorldMaker wrote: post #352
searchableguy wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Could not find files saved in the WSL terminal in explorer (I understand that is a limitation). The was so much unknown going on in the "integration" that I wished I just used a VM and took the perf hit instead of digging to figure out where Windows was mounting the FS and figuring out permissions. You can explore the files stored inside wsl partition by going to \\wsl$ using file manager. You can now also mount an…

In very recent versions of Windows 10 WSL will even add directly to File Explorer a shortcut in the usual Locations pane (left-hand panel with quick folders/PC/whatnot) to \\wsl$ with a Tux icon. It's amusing seeing Tux every time you open File Explorer, and possibly even more amusing that Microsoft is installing that shortcut themselves.

[deleted]

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#357

Post by WorldMaker »

turtlebits wrote: post #305
fluidcruft wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience is that Windows Subsystem for Linux has been amazing on Windows and just keeps getting better. I've also never noticed any difference in spinning up VMs. But anyway I get keeping with familiar tools but, I just disagree that MacOS is a better or even "sane" terminal platform. All the ancient GNU tools Mac ships and BSD-style "but Posix!" pedantry drives me up the wall.

I have not used a current version WSL, but it was terrible when I tried it. Could not find files saved in the WSL terminal in explorer (I understand that is a limitation). The was so much unknown going on in the "integration" that I wished I just used a VM and took the perf hit instead of digging to figure out where Windows was mounting the FS and figuring out permissions. I have no desire to look at WSL ever again.…

WSL2 has fewer "magic unknowns". WSL1 used the NT Kernel emulating the Linux kernel so there was a lot of (seeming) magic in that interop, because it relied on low level NT details that don't look like "normal" Windows to Windows.

The files, for instance, were stored in NTFS but with Linux metadata in alternate data streams. Akin to what macOS used to call Resource Forks, except alternate data streams are far more rare in Windows and most native Windows apps trample over them. Microsoft didn't advertise where to find those files specifically because they didn't want people using Windows apps on those files and breaking Linux metadata. Instead, Microsoft heavily encouraged using /mnt/{drive letter}/normal/windows/path (like /mnt/c/users/me/Documents) and normal Windows paths and keeping files you worked on in both environments in the Windows plain old NTFS without alternate data stream weirdness side (because those /mnt drives didn't use the Linux metadata alternate data streams).

Eventually, Microsoft added a Plan9-based file server to WSL1 serving on the \\wsl$ system path for browsing those files and some smarts around it. (Launching a Windows EXE from a WSL terminal would convert the Linux path to the \\wsl$ path for instance.)

WSL2, on the other hand, is an extremely lightweight (Hyper-V based) VM, uses a real Linux kernel, and generally uses VM tech. Files are stored in a standard VHD, which can be explored with plenty of VM tools (including Windows File Explorer). They are still accessible in File Explorer through the \\wsl$ service. (Though in that case Windows can mount them using standard VHD mounting. The direction of the Plan9-based file server winds up reversed from WSL1 in that it is used instead by the VM to access host machine files through the VM barrier.)

As for F#, F# itself is an open source project with possibly a lot more of a "community project" mentality than it is an "official" Microsoft release. I don't know if that changes your opinion, but it is one of the projects where Microsoft has best embraced open source. (Including some of the potential downsides of open source, like needing Github Issues filed on broken documentation or it will go unnoticed/unfixed.)

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#358

Post by goatinaboat »

tenacious_tuna wrote: post #203
plg- wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's beyond me why would anyone willingly use an Apple product Final users don't see this mess.

Hiya! Former mac native developer here, moving to a new company. My new corp gave me the option of a thinkpad running windows or a Mac, and I chose the mac just so I could have a sane terminal experience, UNIX-like tools, etc. I would vastly prefer to use Linux, but unfortunately that's just not an option for a company-issued machine at this juncture--and in my experience it's easier to spin up a VM on a Mac than a W…

I chose the mac just so I could have a sane terminal experience, UNIX-like tools, etc.

Well, that’s on you. You could have had WSL2 which is amazing.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#359

Post by pjfin123 »

enriquto wrote: post #100
toyg wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when that button is clicked by, perhaps, only 10% of the users 10%? I think FOSS developers would be extremely happy if even 1% clicked on that kind of button. I reckon the actual stat is closer to 0.01%... This is absolute scroogerism from our mobile overlords. We badly need a really-open alternative to the Google/Apple world of feudal taxes.

> We badly need a really-open alternative F-Droid is a thing

Is there an easy way to make F-Droid install updates automatically? I use both F-Droid and Google Play on my phone but manual updates are a huge usability pain.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#360

Post by Ensorceled »

joshstrange wrote: post #284
Ensorceled wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I'm wondering if my next work computer will be something different after almost 20 years of working on NeXT/Mac OS X/MacOS because I'm not sure general development will continue to be viable on the M1s. Spent another weekend moving my wife over to a new Windows machine ... not interested in that environment.

> I'm not sure general development will continue to be viable on the M1s. I'm not trying to carry water for Apple here but what types of development are you talking about that won't be able to continue on the M1? Sure a lot of stuff wasn't there at launch but it looks like even docker (which was speculated to take a long time to get working) is getting close to a solution for arm and x86 containers to run on the M1.…

Maybe nothing, but every cycle this gets harder and how long I have to wait for the dust to settle gets longer.
Post reply on HN