What does this mean for PowerShell?
Nada. This is an addition to PowerShell, like Services For Unix was back in the day. Different use cases and there are a lot of things from both ends that don't map to the other.
Ubuntu on Windows
581–590 of 933 posts
Re: Ubuntu on Windows
#582Earlier quoted context omitted.
It means I need to install Visual Studio. Right now I'm only developing on Mac OS X and Linux. On top of this, every time Microsoft updates Visual Studio, things like firebird tend to break :( I'd rather use a toolchain I know better. In fact, I'd love to use clang on Windows.
> It means I need to install Visual Studio. I mean, sure, but (unless things have changed dramatically in the many years since I was a Windows dev) you don't have to do anything more than install VS. The compilers and nmake can be used without opening the GUI. IIRC, you can feed a VS project file (or -I'm pretty sure- a solution file) to nmake and get the same result you'd get from loading the GUI and pressing build.
Confirming you can feed a .sln file to msbuild (I did it the other day), no idea about whether nmake accepts them. Source: https://www.wireshark.org/docs/wsdg_html_chunked/ChSetupWin3... .
Re: Ubuntu on Windows
#583Fantastic!
Curious to know how tight it is tied to Ubuntu.
Presumably very little or none.
Also, would it require Windows 10 Pro? I suspect so.
Re: Ubuntu on Windows
#584Great! I've been waiting for the day I can `rm -rf system32`.
Re: Ubuntu on Windows
#585Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's be honest here. Does this change make some developers actually even consider to change their OS X/Linux Desktops to Windows? Yeah it is really cool thing that we can finally use windows cmd like the terminal on unix systems however: - What about lack of all the Linux/OS X GUI software? - What about lack of all the UNIX OS features? - What about all those billions and billions of Windows malware, viruses, adware…
Although I've been a primarily C# dev for years, I gradually moved to Ubuntu, and then to OSX, all because of the better terminal/s. I like Macs, but OSX, its window management system, finder, is really bad. Having bash environment available on Windows is an incredible feat and a reason alone to reconsider Windows again. Hopefully, it won't be limited to W10.
If you are moving back to Windows, then you are moving forward to Windows 10
Re: Ubuntu on Windows
#586This is great to see, as it's very similar to the approach that we took with LX-branded zones on SmartOS[1][2]. I commented at some length on the other thread on this on HN[3], but I have a bunch of questions about apps that we know to be thorny: Go, strace, tcpdump, systemd, etc. As we learned, this approach is entirely possible -- but there are many, many details to be nailed before you get to the point that you ca…
Bryan, huge fan here! I agree and believe this is just a primer to making that happen. I'd personally like to see containers become the default for application deployment and sandboxing on all operating systems: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-you-should-help-me-create... Any chance you're planning for a "desktop" version of SmartOS?
We're not -- but that's not to say we wouldn't encourage it! Bluntly, for us it's a driver issue: things like WiFi NICs are infamously varied and buggy, and we have our hands full (just) supporting modern server hardware. But don't let that stop you!
Re: Ubuntu on Windows
#587Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've read comments where people wrote that NT always had some kind of POSIX subsystem, and it has probably just now been completed and expanded. Can't find any substantial writings on this, but it seems likely.
Not only did NT have a POSIX subsystem, but once upon a time I used it (when it was packaged as SFU, Services for Unix). It wasn't a pleasant experience. This will have been quite a bit more work than just a POSIX layer, IMO; POSIX defines a bunch of low-level functions that lie just under the C runtime library, but Linux defines a bunch more that expect a certain view of the world - things like clone(2), which lets…
I still use SUA every day when I'm forced to use Windows. (I also run Linux binaries on BSD.)
SUA is based on an old version of BSD, not GNU. tcsh, csh and sh. The compiler works. There is an old version of lex. For some of the userland, Windows binaries are provided, such as vi. It's better than nothing.
Why did MS remove SUA from Windows 10? What harm would it do to remain an optional add-in as it was in Windows 7?
Why do users have to upgrade to Windows 10 to use Linux binaries? Seems like Microsoft will do _anything_ to get users to upgrade. What are the privacy implications of Windows 10? Microsoft is very untrustworthy.
Will users be able to run their own Linux binaries on Windows?
Windows has never been a "pleasant experience". It's the unpleasantness of it that makes the alternative, UNIX, so appealing.
Re: Ubuntu on Windows
#588Surprised I don't see anyone else mentioning this. This looks to me like typical Microsoft strategy that they utilized a lot 25 years ago. 1. when not leader in given market, make your product fully compatible with competitor 2. start gaining momentum (e.g. why should I use Linux, when on Windows I can run both Linux and Windows applications) 3. once becoming leader break up compatibility 4. rinse and repeat Happened…
Thank you for mentioning this! Really bothered by all the positive comments, especially coming from savvy HN users. Gave this a long look and my main beef is that I couldn't possibly do anything on a Windows Machine in its' current state. Linux isn't just about running apps - there's a philosophy behind the system. Users first! As long as Microsoft continues to disrespect the rights of users in regard to privacy, dat…
I think a key point that is being missed here is most of the people excited about this probably run OSX, not Linux. OSX has long been the "'Linux' for people who don't really want to run Linux" (not really meant as an insult, I'm typing this from OSX right now).
Apple is just as proprietary, commercial and anti-competitive as Microsoft here.
FWIW, this excites me because it potentially means I can go from two machines to one, and always have IE/Edge at my fingertips. It will greatly improve my dev workflow if it pans out like people are hoping it does.
Re: Ubuntu on Windows
#589Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea, I think they are going after developers who use OS X because it is UNIXy. Smart move given how en vogue Apple laptops have become for developers these days.
Let's be honest here. Does this change make some developers actually even consider to change their OS X/Linux Desktops to Windows? Yeah it is really cool thing that we can finally use windows cmd like the terminal on unix systems however: - What about lack of all the Linux/OS X GUI software? - What about lack of all the UNIX OS features? - What about all those billions and billions of Windows malware, viruses, adware…
I think this move by MS is wonderful and I support it completely - but there is one concern that you've left out that makes me more worried than anything.
I'm someone who doggedly persisted trying to dev on my windows box because the stability, speed, app support, GUI niceness of windows is just far superior to Ubuntu (I won't speak to OS X since I've only done minimal dev on it). I won't go into a lengthy defense of this claim - but will if pressed.
I put up with all the failed python module installations - the hunting around for the right VisualStudio compiler... the 64bit python install issues... on and on... I put up with it all... only to be defeated in the end by various node modules failing to install because they use ridiculous depth in their directory file structure that the windows filesystem can't handle. Our projected needed those dependencies. Something had to give.
So I tried vagrant VM with virtualbox - and shared folders... so I could keep my windows GUIs without needing to sshing everything to the VM. Somehow - even though the shared folders thing means the VM is ultimately using the windows filesystem - the node modules would install okay. BUt then I had problems with symlinks (which was solveable with effort)... But the worst thing was that various files, and sometimes whole directories would randomly have their permissions changed inextricably such that NO ONE - not even an admin user could touch them. The VM would get locked out, I would get locked out... it was horrid. It happened in the middle of a rebase once. Sad times... Sad... sad times.
So - I ditched vagrant and shared folders and use a totally contained VM with the ubuntu GUI... it's slow and horrid and it makes me cry... but at least I can alt-tab and waste time in a browser in the windows GUI if I want to.
So anyhoo - my concern. This approach by MS is going to mean everything plays with the same windows file-structure yeah? Or does the ubuntu thing get it's own self contained filey-bits to play with?
Cause if the former... then I will have the fear... THE FEAR... when I try to use it.
Re: Ubuntu on Windows
#590Earlier quoted context omitted.
no kidding, I have a 4K monitor that looks awesome when hooked up my macbook and terrible when hooked up to my Windows desktop
Win10 on my dual 4ks looks great. What issues do you have?
I'm not really sure if you're serious about this question...
Well the task manager for example, the header is rendered per pixel, the rest of the window is a blurry mess. File Explorer window scales with DPI setting but for some reason the fonts still render at 4k pixel size even at 175% scaling making it very hard to read. Chrome looks like its rendering at much lower resolution then blowing back up. Resizing a busy window chugs my GTX 980 yet the Haswell integrated GPU on my MBP 13" handles 5120x2800 pretty well on OSX.
Why can't they just supersample the user-selected resolution then shrink back down to 4k like OSX? Everyone already has retina assets for their app.