351–360 of 493 posts
Are the people behind this project the same as the Free95 team?
Isn't that the OS from the 1990's that never got anywhere, and then the same people made ReactOS? googles Ah, no, that was FreeWin95. What on earth is Free95, it feels like history repeating itself…
https://github.com/versoft-software/free95/
They also forked Uinxed kernel so as to run their userland.
I believe they are the same. Still, it makes sense what they are trying to do.
Someone please create a windows 7 like user interface or even XP like interface too and you got yourself a serious fan I might seriously recommend it to newbies and like there is just this love I have for windows 7 even though I really didn't use it for much but its so much more elegant in its own way than windows 10 like it can be a really fun experiment and I would be interested to see how that would pan out.
You should try KDE with https://github.com/ivvil/aerothemeplasma The screenshots could easily fool me into believing it actually is Windows 7 :p
Earlier quoted context omitted.
...isn't that the point of this entire subthread? The kernel itself doesn't provide the stable ABI, userland code that the binary links to does.
No. On NT, kernel ABI isn't defined by the syscalls but NTDLL. Win32 and all other APIs are wrappers on top of NTDLL, not syscalls. Syscalls are how NTDLL implements kernel calls behind the scenes, it's an implementation detail. Original point of the thread was about Win32, UWP and other APIs that build a new layer on top of NTDLL. I argue that NT doesn't break its kernel ABI.
[0] as long as you don't use APIs they decided to add and remove in a very short period (longer read: https://virtuallyfun.com/2009/09/28/microsoft-fortran-powers...)
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…
You never ran into a GLIBC version problem?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only because people aren't putting in the effort to build their binaries properly. You need to link against the oldest glibc version that has all the symbols you need, and then your binary will actually work everywhere(*). * Except for non-glibc distributions of course.
But to link against an old glibc version, you need to compile on an old distro, on a VM. And you'll have a rough time if some part of the build depends on a tool too new for your VM. It would be infinitely simpler if one could simply 'cross-compile' down to older symbol versions, but the tooling does not make this easy at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ask your friend if he would CC0 the quote or similar (not sure if its possible but like) I can imagine this being a quote on t-shirts xD Honestly I might buy a T-shirt with such a quote. I think glibc is such a pain that it is the reason why we have so vastly different package management and I feel like non glibc things really would simplify the package management approach to linux which although feels solved, there…
Non-glibc distros (musl, uclibc...) with package managers have been a thing for ages already.
I like the idea of it, but Linux hardware support is still crap, and will get worse as ARM becomes more entrenched. What boggles my mind is why Google hasn't gotten more serious about making Android a desktop OS. Pay the money needed to get good hardware support, control the OS, and now you're a Microsoft/Apple competitor for devices. Yes there is the Chromebook, but ChromeOS is not a real desktop OS, it's a toy. Goo…
> but Linux hardware support is still crap What are you talking about? Everything for desktops work out of the box unless you have something weird and proprietary, and even then most distros have support anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not an expert on this, but my question is, how does windows manages to achieve it? Why can't Linux do the same?
because they care about ABI/API stability.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://j00ru.vexillium.org/syscalls/nt/64/ (One example: hit "Show" on the table header for Win11, then use the form at the top of the page to highlight syscall 8c)
Changes in syscall numbers aren't necessarily breaking changes as you're supposed to use ntdll.dll to call kernel, not direct syscalls.
I like the idea of it, but Linux hardware support is still crap, and will get worse as ARM becomes more entrenched. What boggles my mind is why Google hasn't gotten more serious about making Android a desktop OS. Pay the money needed to get good hardware support, control the OS, and now you're a Microsoft/Apple competitor for devices. Yes there is the Chromebook, but ChromeOS is not a real desktop OS, it's a toy. Goo…
> I like the idea of it, but Linux hardware support is still crap, and will get worse as ARM becomes more entrenched. Linux arguably has better compatibility than Windows, but it's nuanced as it depends on what devices you're interested in. > What boggles my mind is why Google hasn't gotten more serious about making Android a desktop OS. Google is seriously working on making Android a desktop OS, Android 16 is only t…