←back to thread

Ubuntu on Windows

(blog.dustinkirkland.com)
2049 points bpierre | 4 comments | 30 Mar 16 16:35 UTC | HN request time: 0.615s | source
Show context
bcantrill ◴[30 Mar 16 19:35 UTC] No.11392265[source]▶
This 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 can run production applications on it. So while the journey across the uncanny valley of Linux is long and arduous, we know from our experience that it can be done. Very much hoping that Microsoft gets to the other side -- and that they open source it all so we can all learn from one another!

[1] http://www.slideshare.net/bcantrill/illumos-lx

[2] http://us-east.manta.joyent.com/patrick.mooney/public/talks/...

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11392119

replies(5): >>11392299 #>>11392418 #>>11393777 #>>11395242 #>>11395345 #
tkinom ◴[30 Mar 16 19:55 UTC] No.11392418[source]▶
Can windows 10

    apt-get install/run most/all the x/gtk base apps

    apt-get build from source those apps.

    ?
If so, I will consider switch.
replies(1): >>11392455 #
NateDad ◴[30 Mar 16 19:59 UTC] No.11392455[source]▶
No. No GUI applications (currently, and no announced future support... and I wouldn't bank on them doing it).
replies(7): >>11392517 #>>11392570 #>>11392716 #>>11392718 #>>11392848 #>>11394041 #>>11412719 #
mcpherrinm ◴[30 Mar 16 20:28 UTC] No.11392718[source]▶
Fortunately X11 is "network transparent" and there's X11 servers for windows. It shouldn't actually be that hard to make this work (though the perf will probably be pretty bad in a naive implementation).

At very worst you could SSH to localhost and X11-forward to the same host -- but you can optimize that.

replies(3): >>11392743 #>>11392964 #>>11394373 #
ageofwant ◴[31 Mar 16 01:24 UTC] No.11394373[source]▶
Or you could just use ubuntu...

It amazes me that people will rag on linux because its "hard" and then build these elaborate Rube-Goldberg machines to avoid the most obvious solution.

replies(5): >>11394456 #>>11394513 #>>11394519 #>>11394591 #>>11395584 #
1. coldtea ◴[31 Mar 16 01:58 UTC] No.11394519[source]▶
>It amazes me that people will rag on linux because its "hard" and then build these elaborate Rube-Goldberg machines to avoid the most obvious solution.

It amazes that people don't understand that one's usage patterns might be different, so "just use Ubuntu" wouldn't be applicable (e.g. UNIX savvy guy who appreciates the shells and userland, but nevertheless wants to do Windows .NET development, or work with native and proprietary Windows programs the rest of the time).

replies(1): >>11395113 #
2. ageofwant ◴[31 Mar 16 05:09 UTC] No.11395113[source]▶
The "UNIX savvy guy" will just use Windows when he needs to, either in a VM, a Azure windows instance or his company provided laptop and call it a day.

All the yakka spent on avoiding the obvious solutions to justify "usage patterns", should signal any half-aware dev that those precious patterns are broken.

replies(2): >>11395803 #>>11396135 #
3. rkangel ◴[31 Mar 16 08:41 UTC] No.11395803[source]▶
Yes, I will "just use Windows" when all the dev tools for my embedded environment are only available for Windows.

And when I'm stuck on Windows for whatever reason, I'll be immensely grateful to be able to do that with a bash shell and all my normal configuration and tools.

4. coldtea ◴[31 Mar 16 10:35 UTC] No.11396135[source]▶
>The "UNIX savvy guy" will just use Windows when he needs to, either in a VM, a Azure windows instance or his company provided laptop and call it a day.

Still missing the fact that he could be needing them 24/7 for his work...