Slashdot Mirror

Back in the day coLinux looked interesting, but it didn't get much love from the community. What Microsoft is doing here feels like coLinux. If anything, they put up the white flag and surrendered, and may as well keep whatever territory they got left. If people keep booting into a Linux desktop one day they may not boot back.

I've been running Linux natively for years now, and I am no longer capable of using a Windows computer properly. Back in the day I was a Windows user, sharing my computer with my family, I always kept an eye out for things that could run Linux on my Windows box without swapping hard drives or fucking around with LILO (yeah, long time ago), especially after reinstalling Windows erased the bootloader.

Cygwin sucked, so I didn't use it. MinGW was better in a few places, and sucked more in others. The suckiness was pretty much based on the fact that it was a GNU environment on a Microsoft platform. Square hole drilled in a round peg with a grenade launcher.

I made the split towards native Linux when I got my own laptop that I didn't share with anybody and never looked back except to confirm that I may turn to stone if I keep looking. All my proper jobs have been mainly on Desktop Linux (with that one time when they gave me a Mac and I had to use Xcode).

Think http://www.colinux.org/ -- basically porting the kernel to run on Windows rather than bare hardware, and use Windows process management and scheduling etc. Then making a few tweaks to the low level libraries and building stuff on the resulting platform.

That thing - coLinux - was the best thing I've ever used in terms of Linux over Windows... I was really sad they couldn't get it running on 64bit hardware.

Does Windows support running Linux apps? No.

Windows does not acively support it (that's not the issue), but it certainly does not BLOCK it either:

http://www.colinux.org/
Cygwin
MingW

And then there's various VMs and so on.

One thing that would be awesome is a 64bit coLinux port!

coLinux is a win32 application with drivers that lets you run a Linux kernel with userspace natively in Windows - it is much lighter than any virtualisation option out there, and using Xming you can easily run GUI apps that launch and run just as well as if they were natively ported to windows.

Unfortunately the drivers were never ported to 64-bit, and thus is it now useless on all but the oldest computers out there. A 64-bit coLinux port would be a requirement to getting this awesome project back on its rails.

See:
http://www.colinux.org/
http://colinux.wikia.com/wiki/Dashboard_for_developing_a_64_bit_coLinux

And also andLinux - which offered an easy way to install and configure coLinux - think of it like coLinux being the Linux kernel and andLinux the Linux distribution...
http://www.andlinux.org/

I would love to be able to use coLinux again on my work PC, which (unfortunately) has to run Windows.

Pffft, "ins and outs of the linux kernel"?

Still not Dan Aloni. When you see the Linux kernel, and think to yourself "Hey, this would make a great driver for Windows!", come see me.

Done. This will even let you install Linux on it.

I used to develop Ruby on Rails applications on a Windows XP box. I had a Linux VM (actually a colinux Windows process) with the database and the application server, because running RoR on Windows is so painful and furthermore I had to deploy on linux anyway. I used Windows for all the client applications (the browser, occasional use of graphic programs). I edited with emacs inside colinux. Then I realized that all the software I was using was open source (thunderbird, open office, media players, etc) and reformatted my pc to linux. I'm using a few Virtualbox Windows VMs to test with IE now but my workflow greatly improved by developing on the native platform I'm developing for. And no, I don't need Windows for games (that would have been a problem).

Fastest and most compatible way to run Linux programs on Windows (which doesn't even need any special hardware) ?

http://colinux.org/

Others have mentioned virtualisation as a means of running Linux on Windows, but if your computer doesn't have a hypervisor this can be dog slow. Other alternatives are trying out a coLinux based distro such as TopologiLinux or andLinux, coLinux is a modified Linux kernel that runs as a process under Windows, so it is just like running an application on Windows. Another option is using Ubuntu's Wubi installer, the installer runs under Windows, installs to a loopback filesystem (a filesystem stored within a file) and uses the Windows bootloader, so no repartitioning required, and it makes installing and uninstalling Linux as easy as any other program on Windows, this will run a little slower than a regular install due to the loopback filesystem, but for trying Ubuntu it is a good option.

Pendrivelinux uses colinux http://www.colinux.org/ to run a linux kernel as a windows process without using any general purpose PC virtualization software.

I have not used pendrivelinux 2009, but I have an earlier version of pendrivelinux based on the Qemu emulator. Here's a link to Qemu USB Pendrivelinux Persistent Linux: http://www.pendrivelinux.com/portable-qemu-persistent-pendrivelinux/

You might want to experiment with both of these options. .

All of the problems I ever have with PulseAudio are related to ALSA (lack of ALSA driver). I've never had a problem with Pulse itself. And some of the cool things PulseAudio does are nice, like software mixing and network sound (very useful for projects like CoLinux). And I realize other projects have done the same thing, but the exciting thing about PulseAudio is you don't need to know that it's there for your program to work.

Seriously though, if you include Cooperative Linux then you get to include most of the Posix/Unix/Linux free-software universe.

But still, I say Wubi is the #1 piece of free software to be had on Windows -- har har har. :P ;)

jdb2

I have never virtualized Linux within Windows and never intend to, but I routinely virtualize WinXP on my Gentoo laptop

coLinux seems to work well for when I do. My wife insists on booting her PC into Windows due to some stupid bug with Flash not showing some stupid menu in some stupid Facebook game. I've used coLinux on there so that computer isn't a completely useless box while being a Facebook terminal.

Not that I'm bitter or anything. (I'm looking at you Adobe)

You might be interested in cooperative linux.

It's a linux kernel ported to run (natively) on windows. No virtualization.

Windows, for example.

Yes, but does it run Linux?

Yes.

I'm asking because there are only Windows drivers for EXT2

If you feel like doing a little manual work, you could use coLinux to load those obscure file systems like Ext3, ReiserFS and XFS.

I hear there are no versions of the Linux kernel that run under windows.

From http://www.colinux.org/ Cooperative Linux is the first working free and open source method for optimally running Linux on Microsoft Windows natively. More generally, Cooperative Linux (short-named coLinux) is a port of the Linux kernel that allows it to run cooperatively alongside another operating system on a single machine. For instance, it allows one to freely run Linux on Windows 2000/XP...

Microsoft can add Linux as a subsystem inside Windows without leeching anything from anyone. But if Microsoft does this secretly, Linus Torvalds and other authors of Linux are being leeched from. The GPLv2 allows reuse of code by those who preserve "an appropriate copyright notice". Removing these notices is not only copyright infringement but also plagiarism, and it is leeching because a lot of people who write free software do so for name recognition to develop their CVs.

GNU GPL on a work says it is available under some conditions, mostly involving credit and reciprocal sharing of code that runs in the same process. Lack of a license statement on an out-of-print orphan work, on the other hand, says it is not available at all. How does making a work not available at all "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts"?

For your needs I would rather recommend andLinux, which is a handy installer for coLinux+Ubuntu.

coLinux installs the whole Linux kernel as a ring 0 driver in windows, and installs the whole linux filesystem as a windows file. You then run your normal Linux OS applications through a native Windows headless X server. It works just great, with performance similar to that of User Mode Linux.

Wubi installs a loopback image of Ubuntu that can be dual-booted into in parallell with Windows. That means you can't have your windows apps runnign at the same time as your windows apps.

Others have recommended VMWare, but for the kind of usage where you don't have to mess around with different guest OS images, but just install once and run, I favour coLinux's approach. andLinux is just a nifty way to get it installed.

I used coLinux for a while three years ago, and it was great, but difficult to get running (particularly the networking). andLinux just makes it work.

Colinux is exactly that: http://www.colinux.org/

Its a linux distro that runs on top of the NT kernel

Runs pretty fast, for what it's worth

I know you meant this in jest, but...

http://www.colinux.org/

Not the best example. Try this instead.

It's like http://www.colinux.org/, but multi-platform. It really does not feel like revolutionary stuff...
CoLinux lacks only a good and painless frontend, and transparent support for X which would create new Windows instead of a X Server client containing Windows. The MacOS port does not feel like big stuff.
The only point of this VM would be performance.

The odd thing is that no-one has replied with "Yes, get it from http://www.colinux.org/". I've found it to actually be useful, and not just a toy. Still takes a little work to get it running, and you don't get the same performance.

Actually I think CoLinux (http://www.colinux.org/) would be closer...

You mean coLinux ?

You left out dosemu (the earliest hardware virtualization, using the V86 mode of all 386-compatible processors - but also supporting 32-bit DPMI applications) and DOSBox (which is based on bochs). Also Cooperative Linux for running a Linux system under other OSes, such as Windows.

Cooperative Linux is the first working free and open source method for optimally running Linux on Microsoft Windows natively. More generally, Cooperative Linux (short-named coLinux) is a port of the Linux kernel that allows it to run cooperatively alongside another operating system on a single machine. For instance, it allows one to freely run Linux on Windows 2000/XP, without using a commercial PC virtualization software such as VMware, in a way which is much more optimal than using any general purpose PC virtualization software. In its current condition, it allows us to run the KNOPPIX Japanese Edition on Windows (see Screenshots).

You can do it the other way around with Colinux - http://www.colinux.org/

What are you a Microsoft stockholder?

Why can't you write your own device drivers anymore? Nothing stopping you.
Its called no more unsigned drivers. You need to purchase a certificate. If you wanted to talk to your computer (hardware) directly, you can't without purchasing a yearly license. Where would BG be if IBM did that for him back in 1981?

You can't rebuild your linux kernel without turning on the PC, so?
Your not very good at expressing yourself are you?

I see tons of benchmarks being published everyday. Granted, there are a few licenses that don't allow this, mostly beta products, and only then because they probably are representative of the final product.
Read your Microsoft EULA, you haven't been allowed to benchmark any Microsoft Product and publish for six years.

I can't take a legally purchased linux binary and run it on windows.
You can. http://www.colinux.org/

When hard drives are like $40 for a 200GB drive, cry me a river that windows takes up 1.5GB of disk space.
Try 4gig. And what do you get? Base install, Win98:350Meg. Win2000:800Meg.
I like to know where your shopping. All the 200GB drives I see run from $100 to $190 US.

I can't get have my money back that I spent on paying for an internet connection I needed to download linux either.
I got my first Linux distro (TransAmeritec) back in 1995 off the shelf in a computer store. Whats your point? You didn't know you can buy a supported Linux distribution off a shelf (or in the back of a book)? Bonus, if you bought it off the self you get support or your money back if you don't like it.

I can't have days added back to my life span for having to waste my time fixing linux bugs or trying to find drivers for hardware that just gets recognized by windows.
Obviously you never used a computer before 1995. Your a newbie at Linux but your fixing bugs? I'm sorry that your Linux experience is different from the rest of us. There are different distributions, maybe you started with the wrong one. Try SuSE or Ubuntu next time.

Not like this has anything at all to do with the article.
My post has everything to do with the article. Refute my assertion that Microsoft isn't open.

Enjoy,

You should take a look at colinux. It takes a little bit to get it set up, but it's not too bad. And once you do, you can stay in windows, but have a fast linux server run in the background -- it's not virtualized at all, but it runs directly as a separate process under windows. For me, it is actually much much faster to run colinux than even cygwin! And they have a debian image, so you have the advantage of apt-get there. You can 'bridge' it to your network, so from your perspective, it just appears as a separate PC on the network, with it's own IP address, etc etc.

Check it out: http://colinux.org/

I remember once someone, who will remain nameless cause he got shitty as me last time I mentioned his name, told me about this great idea they had for the Ubuntu Linux CD. As many people probably know, when you put the install CD in the drive under Windows it currently autoplays and gives you the opportunity to install a number of Open Source apps. He had this great idea (I think) to give people the opportunity to run the live image from the live CD under coLinux. I believe he ran into problems because setting up the network driver is not entirely automatic. It's a good idea he had. It's a shame he never followed up on it.

Worked pretty well for me..except, I can't seem to hit the linux IP, in bridged mode, from Windows.

The bottom line is, they can probably make things better the VMWare ever will be able to do. Simply because they can even change parts of the kernel if needed. VMWare won't be able to compete with something like a sort of coWindows system, right? And that is what MS can build and VMWare simply can't. (coWindows as in coLinux)

If Windows is the host, coLinux is a worthy solution. It runs almost as fast as a native install. And you can download a preconfigured Debian or Gentoo root image from the website.

Basically, it is a Linux kernel patched to run under Windows.

Try colinux: http://www.colinux.org/ for another way to do this. I've used it on 3 laptops now and it works great.

I run Mozilla and Thunderbird on the Linux side, with windows providing nice drivers for all my devices.

when is Linux for Windows coming out
Ages ago.

..those of us who have a reason to use it will reap the benefits. Yes, Virginia, there are some. Battlefield 2, for example.

And unfortunately, you're stuck with an underpowered graphics card. I'll pay the premium for a cohesive Unix desktop, but if Apple is not going to give me a little bit more GPU choice, then I'll just stick with running windows and linux at the same time on the same machine, or remote my Kanotix laptop that lives in the basement.

Well, the poster wants something on Windows.

Yes, and it is called CoLinux

You laugh, but take a look at coLinux (http://www.colinux.org/). Windows runs debian just fine.

Yes!

CoLinux (http://www.colinux.org/)

CoLinux (http://www.colinux.org/)

I suspect we'll be seeing the Mac equivalent of CoLinux (http://www.colinux.org/)very shortly. Cooperative operating systems will allow developers to address the best aspects of both systems - UI from the Mac, drivers from Win/Vista, for example.

Eventually the two commercial oprating systems will merge and become one. The merged system will be co-developed as a joint venture by Apple and Microsoft, who will trade under the name of Cyberdyne Systems.

As modifications have to be made to the host OS to be a Xen host as well, I doubt windows will ever be a Xen host; MS is too headstrong with their own virtualization software. However, you can run coLinux, however, you will run into some performance problems.

CoLinux is a wonderful thing. http://www.colinux.org/

Part of what makes Linux and GPL'd software so nifty is that with access to the source code one can do all sorts of wonderful and unexpected things. Port wondershape to the wrt54g. Replace svgalib with aalib and seamlessly render images and video streams as ascii art. Fit linux onto all sorts of silly places, including a windows device driver. Tune the linux scheduler parameters using adaptive genetic algorithms. Cook up packages for compiz before the distro puts it into stable. The ability to think outside the box and hack things in this manner is simultaneously the strongest advantage OSS has, and it's greatest obstacle.

The greatest obstacle? Firstly, if you simply hire people familiar with open source, those who recognize the value of the above traits, you're likely to get something that satisfies their needs not yours. Maybe that compiz package requires a lot of extra effort on your part, because nobody's written a script to handle the simple textfile changes nessecary. Secondly, integrating silly hacks back into the core is a challenge. On the one hand, integrating them into the core encourages more, which we like. It also means that the hack gets all the benefits of future improvements. On the other hand, not every hack is easily maintainable, nor easily integrated. Every time you reject a patch, you discourage people from offering in the future, and the risk of someone pissed off and forking your project increases. Not that forking things is always bad, but a fork in spite is bound to not only divide resources but increase overheads, potentially causing a net loss in future value of the software.

Shuttleworth believes he can fix this by making communication among groups more explicit. I doubt it will improve anything. On his next attempt, perhaps he should make his team a stakeholder in a very dear sense. Not bonuses for completion or anything silly. Make them run a school with the software -- Eat their own dogfood. The core team will have to shift their focus on making the software work for them in ways similar to other schools. Maybe they could start a school about hacking on OSS. Teach the newbs the labrynthian ways of the autotools, how to take a tarball and make it a .deb, that sort of thing. Something the team wants to be successful and proud of.

It definitely sounds good. At least it removes another 'contra' from long list of IA-32/AMD64 and PowerPC differences. As many of you have known for some time people who run Linux on PPC enjoyed free ride with Mac-On-Linux project. Check http://maconlinux.org/

On side note, after seeing how easy virtualization can happen with Open Source kernels - e.g. User Mode Linux, Xen, Plex, coLinux, etc - me keeps wandering why M$ haven't done that with WinNT kernels. There are only few true obstacles in x86 "architecture" which prevent effective virtualization - VMware is solving all of them at very high level and of course tried in past to charge premium for that. Xen modifies kernel so that overhead of virtualization is negligible - it's not another computer emulator, it's just kernel running as a ordinary OS process. (Anyway, user tasks see computer only as it is reflected by kernel and device drivers (-: )

I know M$ likes only good cash cows (like M$ Office franchise) but as OS kernel concerned, the modifications to allow it to run in virtual machine are truly not that big. Check-out the coLinux - it's neat. http://wiki.colinux.org/cgi-bin/ConvertingDistribu tions

P.S. Or is it what M$ Windows Advanced Server for?