51–60 of 146 posts
> Address POSIX compatibility concerns Best way to address POSIX compatibility concerns is implementing a proper POSIX layer in Windows (and not in a half-baked manner like the now deprecated SUA). I can't imagine how it would hurt anybody.
Is this not what midipix.org intends to do? Granted, they're nowhere near close to being finished at this point in time, but it would be great to see the project pick up steam in this space.
Out of curiosity...why run this as a service? EDIT: I misread this and though it was only a client . Geez. If it's a server, then of course it should be a service.
> Address POSIX compatibility concerns Best way to address POSIX compatibility concerns is implementing a proper POSIX layer in Windows (and not in a half-baked manner like the now deprecated SUA). I can't imagine how it would hurt anybody.
I am waiting the moment when I can throw away WinRM and SSH to all the servers.
You have to create a god damn scheduled task to do Windows Updates over WinRM. And it takes ages for Powershell to realise the task is running, and polling the status of the job is a PITA. Took me days to automate Windows 2012 with Packer. Ugh
> Address POSIX compatibility concerns Best way to address POSIX compatibility concerns is implementing a proper POSIX layer in Windows (and not in a half-baked manner like the now deprecated SUA). I can't imagine how it would hurt anybody.
So, no. You can't "just" implement a POSIX subsystem correctly. These systems are just not compatible. It will always be half broken.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is a valid concern. On the other hand, win32 has a strong developer community with 20+ years of legacy as the primary API of Windows. Now only if Microsoft hadn't try to screw its own developers by trying to push a new framework every 5 years.
It does but as you say due to the emperor's new clothes every few years, the loyalty isn't there now. I know of no companies doing greenfield desktop dev that are using any of their tech. It's all Qt, CEF, python/wx and JavaFX. Even the financial companies we deal with who were pretty heavy with the WPF are canning it next cycle. Incumbent MFC, Winforms and WPF stuff will live as long as VB6 did (and still does) thou…
>> Even the financial companies we deal with who were pretty heavy with the WPF are canning it next cycle.
Where are you based? What are they planning to adopt?
My company is consulting a couple of hedge funds in New York and they have no plans of replacing WPF for their trading apps.
The desktop CLR VM plus proper GPU acceleration makes WPF faster than any alternative (when avoiding binding). As far as I'm aware no other UI toolkit comes anywhere close.
> Leverage Windows crypto api’s instead of OpenSSL/LibreSSL and run as Windows Service Was wondering about that. I'm surprised the OpenBSD team is accepting the commits - something so fundamental and Windows specific doesn't seem like their kind of thing - but great! PS. If you're coming from a Unix background and interested in learning posh: https://certsimple.com/rosetta-stone
Was just coming here to voice my concerns over this choice as well, wondering what their reasoning is for changing crypto systems.
The article is not clear if that's an option with this new Windows port, but it would decrease the attack surface a lot, which can only be good. SChannel has had its fair share of nasties over the years.
I'm interested in how this is going to work in PowerShell with the way everything works now, if there happen to be any details about that (whether here, somewhere else, or a past link)?
I don't know anything about PowerShell, but I have a similar question, I think: how is this going to work? Will I be able to do something like this command line (from my *nix machine)? ssh user@windows.machine.local dir d: | less
> Leverage Windows crypto api’s instead of OpenSSL/LibreSSL and run as Windows Service Was wondering about that. I'm surprised the OpenBSD team is accepting the commits - something so fundamental and Windows specific doesn't seem like their kind of thing - but great! PS. If you're coming from a Unix background and interested in learning posh: https://certsimple.com/rosetta-stone
Why would the OpenBSD team not accept the commits? It is just linking to a system library that will always be present on the platform. It's like saying Windows opensource should be forced to use some thrid party filesystem library.
Looking at the new code I feel like the chances this ever makes it upstream to pretty close to 0.