←back to thread

Ubuntu on Windows

(blog.dustinkirkland.com)
2049 points bpierre | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.232s | source
Show context
bcantrill ◴[] 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 #
crudbug ◴[] No.11392299[source]
I think M$ is targeting more developers with *NIX background on the desktop side rather than Linux apps on server. So a bash support with uniform CLI is the end-game.
replies(2): >>11392350 #>>11393097 #
talawahdotnet ◴[] No.11392350[source]
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.
replies(9): >>11392457 #>>11392525 #>>11392717 #>>11392840 #>>11392967 #>>11393415 #>>11394345 #>>11394921 #>>11395006 #
riotdash ◴[] No.11392840[source]
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 etc.

- What about all the spying and restrictions that Microsoft has integrated into the Windows? (e.g. cannot block Microsoft spy server in the hosts-file, forced updates etc.)

- What about the fact that OS X and Linux have always been at least decent from developers point of view but Windows has always had problems and then things like Vista and Win8 happen.

- What about the advertisements served to you in the login screen?

- What about all the future shit MS will throw at you?

- Other stuff can't remember now

If and IF this will actually work out well, I would say this finally makes Windows usable for software development however I don't see any reason why anyone would change from UNIX based system to Windows unless they plan to make even bigger changes in the future...( like rewriting whole Windows to be UNIX based for example. :) )

replies(14): >>11392937 #>>11392946 #>>11392993 #>>11392999 #>>11393035 #>>11393151 #>>11393163 #>>11393299 #>>11393392 #>>11393419 #>>11394460 #>>11394665 #>>11394800 #>>11395209 #
grovulent ◴[] No.11394800[source]
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.

replies(3): >>11394859 #>>11395299 #>>11395881 #
kbenson ◴[] No.11394859[source]
> 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

Maybe the other way would be easier, use the VM for all dev file storage as well, and export a SMB share that you can connect to from windows. Same sharing capability (as long as the VM is running), but you don't have to worry about different underlying file system semantics.

> 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.

Personally, I would just SSH for access to the VM though, as I find PuTTY superior to having a desktop as a window on a desktop (I would prefer to RDP to a local Windows VM as well). But I use Vim as my IDE, so it's extremely easy for me to do so.

That said, Visual Studio announced support for targeting Linux today (I assume either through SSH to a local VM or remote box and/or the local Linux support they announced here, so that might be an acceptable route in the future.

replies(1): >>11396589 #
1. grovulent ◴[] No.11396589[source]
I'm using atom - I wonder if it has a plugin that will ease ssh pain... thanks for the suggest!