Slashdot Mirror
Porting Debian to... Windows
mike_sucks writes: "The first step to porting Debian to the Win32 platform has been made - dpkg is compiling under Cygwin. Check out the post on debian-devel and the Debian GNU/w32 port's site." Some of the posters on the debian-devel list aren't too pleased with the idea.
I thought this was an odd idea.
Why would anyone want to port an OS to another OS (don't start with "Windows is not an OS, please!")?
Then I saw what this all meant.
If people can get used to using Debian tools and programs on Windows, then they won't be nearly as nervous about using them in a GNU/Linux environment.
Bravo! I can't wait to see how that turns out.
I have 3656.9 Bogomips. How many Bogomips do you have?
Isnt this backward? Should we be porting software from Windows to Linux(e.g., WINE) instead of from Linux to Windows? Come on, Windows has enough good software already. Why spend time porting the useful stuff from Linux into the busted Windows environment?
This makes it easier for people to stay in Windows. I'm gonna do some research because I suspect Bill G. must be behind this.
--- -- - -
Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
This port is meant to run on any win32 implementation. Some win32
implementations are free (wine, reactos), others are not (microsoft).
free implementations are of course recommended and cygwin is proven
to work fine on wine.
Let's see... Install Linux, configure WINE and then....
Install Linux!
VmWare...
Why go through the hassle of porting it, when you can just run it on any OS you like using VmWare...???
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
No. Why would a user move when everything is being brought to them. Seems to me this makes it easier to stay in Windows.
--- -- - -
Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
I remember when this was first discussed on debianplanet, and a lot of people started flipping out. There's simply some places (such as the work office), where one is forced to use a Win32 OS, and cannot dual-boot. Besides, dual-booting is a PITA. If I can "dpkg -i" a package under cygwin, and get to using the gimp VS photoshop, I'll do it in a heartbeat.
:)
At best, one can say that this will deter people from linux. But then again, everyone loves linux because of all the OSS available for it. And if the whole goal is to promote OSS, why neglect the largest user base? Then when people get sick of Windows, they can convert to FreeBSD or Linux or whatever without there being a huge learning curve involved.
I don't think I really agree with the port being called w32 though. win32 is not a moniker that promotes Windows as a winner, it's just the first syllable of the word, just like a lot of nicknames are formed. I wish RMS would spend more time coding than trying to be a politician
If there was a "-1 Not Funny", that'd be my most used mod.
One of the great advantages of the *nix platform that Windows has never really been able to match has been it's remote access capabilities.
I run Windows on my desktop at home, but I also run a Debian GNU/Linux server, for the sole reason so that when I'm away from home, I can telnet into it and read my mail, use IRC, etc.
I even have a Nokia 9210, and using it I can telnet to my Debian box and then use IRC from anywhere in Europe, Asia, or indeed anywhere with a GSM 900/1800 signal. (Basically, anywhere except USA. Suck. :)
Being able to do "apt-get install telnetd irc" on a Windows box would be very nice indeed!
is when people start griping for commercial software as easy and smart as their free stuff.
;)
;)
Yes, this already goes on sometimes (in server rooms, say), but it's still funny and as much a contrarian in-joke in many cases as it is a genuine sentiment. When it stops being funny -- well, that *will* be funny
I'd like to see Red Hat & c. (IBM is doing this a bit) play up the HUGE upgrade free software means when it comes to complexity, ongoing costs, etc.
Ongoing costs for software rental / licensure (and remember, companies don't *buy* most software, esp. from Microsoft -- they purchase quite restrictive licenses) are like holes in your money bag. From a business standpoint, they'd better be doing a lot of "making your memos more productive" to make up for it.
The more software that can be apt-get installed, the flatter the (overstated) learning curve becomes. Someone will probably make sure that Windows has a cute apt-get wizard too
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
The folks here who *have* to run windows, don't really, they *have* to run certain windows apps, because they are a defacto standard in the relevant application domain and the linux apps aren't quite up to par yet and WINE isn't quite ready for that app.
They'll never willingly quit Windows cold-turkey, but if they can start to run debian/gnu/linux (pick one) apps on Windows, eventually the linux apps will overtake the quality of the windows apps and the people will then be using them and have no reason not to switch (cost, cost, cost).
I used to think that linux on the desktop wasn't a goal worth persuing at the moment - then I realized every Windows/Office purchase is money for Microsoft to use on its quest to eliminate linux.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
As an experienced (~10 year) developer who has spent most of his time in the Win32 world and a little bit in the *nix court, this is good news for me.
A lot of people think Windows is inflexible because it does not have a layered windowing system ala X, but this is not an issue if someone wants to write a shell for the OS to replace Explorer (see http://www.geoshellx.com for a very basic implementation). It's not easy, but it's not forbidden or blocked by the OS architecture in any way. If someone wants to bring this type of good stuff to Windows, I think everyone will be more than happy.
By giving Windows developers access to the great development tools of Linux/Unix (Cygwin et all..) I think you make it easier to have developers stick with windows than switch.
I worked at a small software house that had a linux "mainframe" . Developers machines were dual boot Linux/NT. The NT had a Xserver and once Cygwin was installed on the NT side almost noonne booted into linux ever..WinCVS and SAMBA, TCL for windows, emacs, perl and Java, X made it super easy to do development on NT as opposed to using those tools in the native linux world. once compenets were build they could be loaded onto the linux machine and tested.
I think it may make some more open to using linux, but not as many as those who stick it out with windows longer because the tools are almost the same now.
Waste of time? It only wasted a minute of your time, and most of that was wasted by you posting a reply.
Waste of time for the developers? They are working on what they are interested in. If you want them to work on something they are less interested in, pay them. "Silly" side projects is what makes this games work.
Waste of time for the users? Some folks have to use Windows in a job context, because the tools they use are Windows only. Once people are used to Unix tools, it's hard to go back. Plus, what happens to the Wintel platform when:
The user runs free office applications that freely work with Microsoft Office formats, but have an even better native format
The user ignores the latest "vital" Microsoft operating system extensions, in favor of tools ported from the Linux / BSD environments
The user uses non-Microsoft entertainment apps, because they are less restrictive than the "official" ones
Core Microsoft facilities are replaced with ones that work better with the "ported" tools
Users have the option of emulating Windows software/games, or buying a native Linux version, and start to seriously think about the Linux version
The hardest part about moving to Linux is learning the 200 basic facts that allow you to work at all (deleting files is called "removing", user files go here, applications go here, you start X11 by typing "startx", etc.). If you can learn 100 of those facts under a Windows environment, you are half-way there.
This is a stepping stone in a migration to the standard Debian, or it may be the start of new and interesting developments. We just have to wait and see.
(Dammit, responded to an AC again...)
My first exposure to the GNU project was through programs like GNU chess ported to Windows, and the djgpp C compiler for DOS. I think that as people are given the opportunity to see that GNU software solves their problems, they will become more interested, leading to more interest in Linux and GNU software in general. This could be a great way for more of the public to "stick their toes in the water".
I use native win32 ports of gnu tools daily. Why? Because they are small and just work. The application is king. I don't really care where I run it. quixotal
Except for some people who think choosing an operating system of importance equivalent to choosing a religion most of us don't care what OS we use. Instead most people care about what apps they can run on a given OS. My favorite apps/tools are Emacs, Perl, Internet Explorer, WinAmp, ICQ, ssh, bash, grep and Word. Windows runs all of them with the least amount of hassle and that's why I use it. This is true for most of the computer users in the world, the OS that the app happens to run on is incidental.
I used to think that linux on the desktop wasn't a goal worth persuing at the moment - then I realized every Windows/Office purchase is money for Microsoft to use on its quest to eliminate linux.
Short of acquiring a genie and using their three wishes to wish away Linux, Open Source, and college classes on operating systems there's no way that anyone can eliminate Linux. Most reasonable people realize this (including Linus) and rightfully don't see Linux vs. Microsoft as some sort of war that should be won at all costs.
I know RMS is the God of GNU, but he is NOT the deciding factor on a damned thing when it comes to peoples ports. If it's in compliance with the GPL (source code is re-released) then there is no reason why you can't make a Windows 32 port of debian.
Looks too me like all that's been accomplished thus far is a ./configure, make to Debian Base inside Cygwin, no big deal, but you HAVE to have some place to get your feet wet.
Then we hear the rants about how sourceforge is the devil? Since when? I would love to see another FREE (as in someone else gets stuck with the bill) For LOTS of bandwidth and lots of server space. Not to mention free web-hosting, Free CVS, Free advertising, and a whole lot more ... so what if they're owned by VA ... so's /. ...
So where do I stand in my views of Debian ... Like GNU I will not let the views of a few define how I feel about a project as a whole, but it pisses me off and makes me want to kill the whole thing and go to slackware (ohh yeah ... BTW, a little FYI ... apt-sucks ... no one is allowed to make fun of redhat any more ...) And the only reason people from slack like to compile from source ... SIMPLE ... you _can_ compile from source on slack ... try outta the box compiling on RH or Mandrake ...
This Victory Strengthens The Soul
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
Trust me; if you can show me an OS that does everything that Windows does that I like, is more stable, AND is free / cheap, I'll switch
By bringing the apps into your Windows PC you are not getting any proof of anything. You are just getting a better Windows machine. Why would anyone be fool enough to switch from Windows if they can have it all there?
Lets be real, there will always be an app or two that only runs in Windows until there is a critical mass of soccer moms using Linux as a desktop. Ports like this hurt the chances that such critical mass will ever be achieved. Bill likes this.
--- -- - -
Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
Should we be porting software from Windows to Linux(e.g., WINE) instead of from Linux to Windows?
Really, who do you mean by 'we'? This may be a shock to you, but there are some people who actually *ghasp* like windows, myself included. The fact of the matter is, for me, A lot of things are just easier for me to deal with in windows then in Linux, even setting up and running Apache, because I'm more used to it. I have a little Linux box for playing around with, but for the most part I like windows.
I mean, the driving force of Open source software is people doing stuff because they feel like doing it. people doing stuff because they want to. You can't just say "we should work on WINE for accomplishing our political objectives" and then have Everybody magically want to spend their time reimplementing Microsoft skank-nasty APIs
This may bother you, but everything on Debian is Open Source. And that means that you can take it and do whatever you want to with it, including porting it to windows.
If this is a success, there's a good chance I'll be running it.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
...is when the team announce the latest Unstable release, Windows users will feel right at home :)
--- Hot Shot City is particularly good.
maybe it's too hard for OEM's to preinstall RedHat or Debian (insert your fav here), but once they are allowed to 'modify' the default windows desktop (after the court case) then I wonder how many OEM's could be convinced to preinstall cygwin or debian? The results would be a generation of kids growing up on gcc, bash, etc. That would be cool.
the GNU system ran for half a decade on commercial UNIXs. It was designed on commercial UNIXs, this is really nothing new, other then the fact that its got a different interface
Of course, who knows how Stallman would actually feel. He opposed GNU work on the original Macintosh, and he clearly isn't the most rational man...
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
This may shock you but you cannot "take it and do whatever you want to with it". I would receive a Richard Stallman rectal exam if I were to take any of the GPL components of Debian and utilized them in a commercial product without releasing the source. I have done some stupid, dumb things in my life like bungie jumping, walking in certain neighborhoods in New Orleans after midnight and running a NT webserver but there is one thing I would never dare to do. I would never do anything that caused Richard Stallman to come in contact with me. Now that's scary.
Respect the GPL or meet a fate worst than death!
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
No. Why would a user move when everything is being brought to them. Seems to me this makes it easier to stay in Windows.
This makes it easier for people to migrate away from windows. If the path from win32 to Linux is a literally that: a path and not a cliff, people will be more inclined to walk that path. Few people will jump off the cliff, even if what's below is much better.
Once this port is working, then all of our win32 joe-sixpack users will start being exposed to all sorts of software packages that they can use: games, productivity, etc. Gnumeric. Abiword. Xmms. Not demos, but free. Always free. Just download and run. They'll see GNU and OSS in license agreements. They's see it our emails. They'll join announcement mailing lists get immediate upgrades -- for free.
They'll come to expect free software all the time. Not as a political statement. Not as a anti-corporate philosophy. But because they are cheap bastards. No offense. (None taken)
Then, in a couple years, when ol' Bill rolls out his next Windows XS. Joe six-pack will think: "What? He expects me to pay?"
At that time, he say "I've got all this free software that people keep telling me will run on a free operating system." So instead of getting Windows XS, he will get RedHat 10.2.
And the transition will be complete.
One last note: The OSS community often complains about people taking from the community but not giving back. This phenomenon will increase as more joe-sixpack's start using free software. As oss gains more popular, the ratio of those who contribute to those who don't will continute to grow.
Most of these guys wouldn't even know how to contribute if they wanted. They sure aren't going to donate cash, because that's the overidding motivation for the growth of free software beyond your basic slashdot reader: free as in beer. Screw politics.
That's okay. Consider it this way: they're primary contribution to oss and your project is:
1) a big user base bestows legitimacy
2) they *aren't* supporting ms/aol/apple etc.
This will have to be enough. We can *not* spit on these people. We can't view them with contempt because they understand "The specs are open. Write your own device driver to that digital camera."
Software Wars
Some of the posters on the debian-devel list aren't too pleased with the idea.
It's interesting to note that, while porting anything TO Linux is acceptable, porting Linux to something else irritates some.
I think this is something positive. If you can give users of other platform a taste of your own cooking, chances are they'll come for a full meal at some point.
Or at the very least, make them taste something else and open up their minds.
I see this as a teaser, and a pretty good way to get some free software (like Gimp), other than the OS itself, a chance to open up to a new crowd.
So I'd say that while some of the code may not require any modifications, there is probably enough tweaking involved that I would count it as porting.
-- "I am disrespectful to dirt. Can you not see that I am serious!"
Is this about doing good for the users, promoting their freedom to run software on whatever platform they happen to be using?
Or is this about confining users by forcing them to use proprietary software just because their OS is proprietary, in the name of the ongoing battle between free and proprietary software?
If so, this reeks of exactly the same thing as the DMCA, geek profiling, and dozens of other violations of our rights. You have to be very careful when fighting the enemy that you don't become the enemy.
Philosophically, this is the question of, "Does the end justify the means?" I don't have the space to get into that whole debate here, but the short answer is that before you squish a project like this, you better be damn sure it does.
Even Slashdot wants to hide some things
Open source developers aren't simply trying to get Linux used everywhere 'because it's Linux,' they are actually trying to make the software world a little better, more functional.
You would think Slashdot readers would be pleased at a technological advancement.
"You have your tree shakers and your jelly makers."
Translation:
You have your people who make a whole lot of noise and get everything all shaken up. These people are often zealots who are viewed by most rational people as being partially out of their gourds.
Then you have the people who "gather the fruit," so to speak, of the zealots efforts and make something constructive out of them.
You need both types. The tree-shakers are often willing to push boundaries and to take risks that might seem insane, but that in the end serve to advance the cause as a whole. But people rarely listen to nut-jobs, it's up to the level-headed people to transform the work of maniacs into something suitable for everyone (and to filter out the psychotic ideas).
So pay no heed to RMS. He's nuts, and most people recognise that, but thanks to his extremeism, lots of good things have come about (only due to the people who know when to listen to him and when to tune him out).
-- "I am disrespectful to dirt. Can you not see that I am serious!"
A lot of people seem to think that the posters on debian-devel are trying to somehow suppress or forbid this port of software. Although some of us may be uneasy about it, I haven't seen anyone actually suggest that.
The question causing argument is whether this port should be officially recognized by the Debian Project, given that one of our foundational documents says "Debian will remain 100% free software", and that software which depends on non-free software to run is considered "not part of Debian".
The crux of the matter is this, from a post on the list by Stephen Langseck:
I recognize the advantages of a dpkg-based system for cygwin, and think
it's an interesting idea that will benefit many people who can't
necessarily choose the OS of their computer; but even so, I have
misgivings about using the Debian name on such a port. If the non-free
archive is not part of Debian, should a port built on a non-free kernel
be called 'Debian'? After all, unless all the compiling for this port
will be done using Wine and gcc, you effectively will have an entire
port with build-dependencies on non-free software.
Daniel
Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.