Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Releases New Tool To Get More Distros on Windows (zdnet.com)
Microsoft has released a tool to help Linux distribution maintainers bring their distros to the Windows Store to run on Windows 10's Windows Subsystem for Linux. From a report: Microsoft describes the tool as a "reference implementation for a Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) distribution installer application," which is aimed at both distribution maintainers and developers who want to create custom Linux distributions for running on WSL. "We know that many Linux distros rely entirely on open-source software, so we would like to bring WSL closer to the OSS community," said Tara Raj of Microsoft's WSL team. "We hope open-sourcing this project will help increase community engagement and bring more of your favorite distros to the Microsoft Store." WSL helps programmers build a full Linux development environment for testing production code on a Windows machine.
I still like my linux better without proprietary closed-source anything in the vicinity, much less as the host, still less from that totally not shady at all cross fingers honest really company, TYVM.
I am not hating Microsoft but WSL main purpose is to bring Linux compatibility as a secondary purpose to a primarily Windows usage.
This is the case you need or want a Windows systems as your primary, but there is a subset of tools that work much better in Linux, but you don't need them as your primary set of tools.
Most distributions are built in mind of being your primary OS. Then running it in WSL you really don't get to experience all its real advantages.
I guess if a distribution maker may want to make a distribution specialized for WSL they could do that.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I have one computer now that been trying to get Win10 1709 for over 3 months. Keeps getting 83% done then bows off, reloads old version of Win10, then starts at it all over again starting with the download. There is no way to stop it or control it.
You want Linux to run on such a broken system? My Linux boxes are going on over 100 days of uptime (moved from one room to another). Maybe Win10 should be a subsystem to Linux? At least I know Linux is stable enough to run a subsystem.
This concept is backwards. You don't want to run Linux on top of Windows. Instead you want Linux as host and Windows as the guest. You want the most secure layer at the deepest level.
I mean, when /. first started, it was all "embrace, extend, extinguish" with MS using a Borg Gates avatar.
Is this the "embrace" part or the "extend" part of that whole process? Or can we really trust them?
-> I dislike sigs...
Open source wasnt developed as a 'feature' or a clever gimmick that people wanted as part of their computing experience. Open source was developed in direct opposition to the types of traditional licenses and restrictions placed on code and programs from Microsoft and other companies like them. The fact is Linux never needed windows support, and no one has explained the net-gain from supporting the execution of free software that has run stand-alone for decades other than the potential to sell more licenses for the proprietary OS under which it is being made to run.
in other words, given the chance, no one is going to intentionally shell out cash to run GCC on a copy of windows.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Linux on windows = stupid. Windows on linux = ok, but still stupid. Windows is a bloated, fat OS where FAR greater than 75% of its code is there to LIMIT what you can do in some way. It is always working against you and policing what you can do on your own system. Why would you allow it to be the base OS?
Digital is, by definition, imperfect. Analog is the way to go.
Just now, this in my inbox: "Don't be ashamed to buy viagra professional! Live full life" (I tried to keep as much as I could across the translation).
Why is this on-topic? Well, Microsoft: if you want me to trust you, you should at least make a credible attempt at fixing some of the mess you created the last 40+ years with your corporate greed.
Otherwise... I don't trust you. I never did, and I was proved right every single time.
I have no idea. The target audience for this already knows running Linux natively will get them a much more robust environment than Microsoft's goofy non-POSIX compliant OS.
If anything, it's the other way around. Linux is the main OS, and Windows is relegated to a safe little VM that only gets started when absolutely necessary, then shut down ASAP.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Tux Racer, the pinnacle of Linux software, has already been ported To Windows. What could this possibly have to offer my fully functioning Windows machines?
.
The one thing Windows Subsystem For Linux doesn't actually have is....Linux. For once, the argument about GNU/Linux is completely correct and relevant. Linux is the kernel - Windows is using its own kernel for ELF support and various APIs. It isn't Linux. Even the Wikipedia article on the naming controversy states that the shorter Linux "...serves as a generic term for systems that combine that kernal with software from multiple other sources".
I mean, I'm not exactly getting bent out of shape over it. I just find it wryly amusing.
Did they ever provide the necessary APIs and hooks and other things to allow anti-virus vendors to properly monitor and check WSL processes?
A great first step in trying exert control and influence over linux distributions I'm sure.
Lets all hail our microsoft overlords! There would be no linux without microsoft kids - lets teach you that early on.
You you could just dump the bag of crap windows in the bin and install a proper operating system that doesn't try to force/influence/cajole you perpetually into storing documents into the cloud (where it's less secure/easier for others to look at, or better yet, fuck you over completely with a ToS change to get you to pay more, or stop you doing what you want with your own data, or simply chop you off altogether)
Dangerous times.
Other than not having to recompile and relink binaries with cygwin, or Ming, how is this very different?
We can already run pretty much everything of importance on Windows, using Cygwin.
It's insulting that Microsoft claims that enterprises are asking for this.
Why else would they have also maintained a Unix layer on NT for decades prior if no one was asking for something like this? Just because you don’t use something doesn’t mean others don’t.
Don't make a deal with the devil. RMS must be turning in his grave.
This won't be Linux at all, mostly GNU. Rather a lot of GNU software is crap written by unrepentant clowns and supported by professional internet trolls. And some, I assume, is good software.
Putting up a few space trek posters in your moms basement doesn't turn it into an Enterprise solution.
I do not trust Microsoft. Perhaps their intention is to get more Window's buyers by absorbing Linux users and get them more and more into using Windows.
> This is /.
Well, duh.
> Microsoft could cure Cancer and they'd still be considered the most evil ever around here.
And /. would be actually, you know, right in that.
"We know that many Linux distros rely entirely on open-source software..." (and it pisses us off so we're trying to kill it.) Why ANYONE would run linux on Windows is beyond me. Don't fall for the hype. Just move on. There's really nothing to see here.
Release an X server. Also allow direct hardware access, hardware enumeration, driver loading. What's there is quite neutered.
I know a lot of people have ideological objections to WSL, but from a practical standpoint WSL isn't even very good. I tried it for about two weeks before abandoning it.
First, windows has a terrible terminal emulator. I don't think it's improved since Windows 95. Basic stuff like copy/paste is not intuitive, let alone nice features like tabs. I tried an alternative (cmder I think) and it was OK, but something as important as the terminal emulator should not be an afterthought.
Raw sockets didn't seem to work correctly (or at all). I tried a few network tools and they generally fell flat on their face.
It seems really slow. Maybe it's just my imagination, but sometimes I'd do something as simple as an 'ls' and patiently wait.
There was no GUI support out of the box. I had to setup Xming on the windows side. Again, not super complicated, but it seems like little thought was put into it. I don't need a GUI very often (usually just to display plots I generated), but there should have been more effort.
The goal was to basically have python, R, a C compiler, some networking tools, etc, available when I am in Windows and not have to boot a Linux box for basic things. The quality was just too low and went back to using a combination of VMWare and native windows versions.
Maybe it will get better, but it seems like it's trying to solve a problem most people don't have.
WSL is a walled garden, you cannot use it as the primary means to remotely manage a Windows box. For that you are better off installing Cygwin or the like.
Are you still trusting Microsoft? Are you so shallow a person that you don't care if MS is stealing your personal data?
Microsoft = Nazisoft
"Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly."
-- Henry Spencer
IMO Aside from EEE, I see this as it progresses as just another way to clutter Linux search results in popular search engines.
Why is it all about Windows running Linux as a 2nd class citizen?
It would best for Linux to be our core, and make Windows an optional subsystem of a LInux host.
MS wants your money. Even if you need to run a free OS. That's always been the case and hasn't changed. In general, they're winning and this is the start of the endgame for them.
With everyone progressively more and more locked into Office365, this gives MS an argument to say there's not even a need to find a way to unlock and escape.
If all your Linux needs can be met from Windows, how are you ever going to convince the CTO to abandon Windows even for the technical staff?
FB must be wondering why they're getting hit with the privacy stick while Win10 is sitting there keylogging it's head off (you know, to improve user data statistics for your own good).
Just don't use Windows.
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
What the hell are you talking about?! Unix layer for decades? So, all this time, I could have opened a command prompt and entered...
ln -s sourcefile destfile
And it would work? Holy shit! Do you know how much grief this would have saved me decades ago if I had known this?
Telemetry, that's what is missing on a pure distro. I definitely feel safer if I know that there is a bigger entity that control my system and that can upgrade it without my saying anytime for my safety. Finally a Linux with advertising in the main menu....
The soul becomes dyed with the color of its thoughts. - Marcus Aurelius
Was originally released in 1999, so... yeah? Decades.
Is this the "Embrace" or "Extend" phase?
The POSIX layer didn't have symbolic links before at least Windows Vista and they still aren't quite the same.
It makes Windows usable for those of us that must use Windows - admittedly though in a way that Cygwin has done for a long time as well. (Cygwin is better integrated though, while WSL seems more natively Unixy and has proper, familiar, package management with a much greater set of packages available.)
I end up using all three.
(Yes, I said three, there's also the MingW, which is usually the shell used around git on Windows, Microsoft even bundles it with their IDEs.)
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Windows Services for Unix was around since 1999. So, yes, that would span multiple decades.
And that has what to do with anything?
Cygwin does its work at the user level. It's just another Win32 application that use the Win32 API provided by Windows NT kernel to try to do what a POSIX compliant program compiled against Cygwin wants to do.
(Among other things, this causes "fork()" to be slow due to Win32 API sucking at it).
(And as you mention it means that you need to recompile and relink against it).
WSL does its work at the kernel level. Just like Win32 is one of the API tha the NT Kernel provides (and just like the OS/2 API that it did happen to have a long time ago) it's another different API that it proposes and the provides a tiny subset of what a Linux kernel would provide.
(Among other things, this cause "fork()" to be fast because it can rely on concepts that were recently introduced inside the NT kernel but aren't exposed to Win32 such as pico-threads).
(And it makes possible to run the same ELF as under Linux. Well, as long as they only rely on those few APIs that the NT kernel exposes. Network is okay, but forget about any filesystem driver or anything more fancy).
This "runs unmodified elfs" is the main selling point for Microsoft :
a shop witch is mainly Windows-on-the-desktop might be developing code for their Linux server. To test it, the dev might want to run it locally.
Until now, that would have required either running a full blown virtual machine or even dual booting into Linux.
Or switching to another platform like Mac OS X which is unixish enough to allow some (limited) local testing.
(Which, in the perspective of devs would be a performance hit.
And in the perspective of microsoft would be a giant risk of becoming a gateway drug toward the dark side of complete linux migration (or OS X))
Hence the idea of enabling more distros on WSL : so the dev can install whatever distro will be running on the server to better replicate the environment.
But in practice don't hope to use it for anything more than such testing : the functionnality offered under WSL is extremely limited.
(i.e.: they haven't even successfully accomplished the first "E" of "EEE").
It is definitely NOT a replacement for an actual installation of Linux.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
The point is making sure people who develop for a Linux target (a mobile device, a phone, etc) use Windows on their desk.
Has WSL gained support for X.Org or Wayland or both recently? If not, then how is someone who develops a GUI application for an X11+Linux or Wayland+Linux target supposed to test?
I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I actually kind of like WSL. It isn't perfect, and it isn't a "real" VM (it uses a sort of kbi translation layer and is more like a jail or a container than a vm), so some things obviously don't work, particularly system tools. But that's mostly fine. I never liked Cygwin, going back years. Windows Services for Unix was cumbersome and weird. WSL doesn't suffer from as many problems, IMO.
For my home hobby workflow, being able to pop open WSL and have all the bits of Ubuntu that I care about available to write Python code, connect to a database running in RHEL7.4 in VMWare Workstation, and not have the additional overhead of another VM if I don't need it, adding a GUI, or whatever else have you is pretty nice. I have all the Windows software that I want, all the *nix tools that I need, and I can get on with doing my project now that I'm too old to have configuring my computer be my project. (And I don't want another Mac. They keep getting worse with every release, IMO).
Is it a solution for those writing systems software that requires a full Linux kernel? Definitely not. Is it "good enough" for people doing some light dev or working with data sets? Yup, at least to an extent.
You all realize that, right?
Last year I predicted that Microsoft would try to annex Linux, and now I see I was right.
I'll say it again: It's not real Linux if it runs UNDER WINDOWS. Don't fall for it, gentlemen (Gentoo-men?).
Have they disabled telemetry in Windows 10 yet? Why was ON in the _first_ place??
Which of the following would you prefer that the maintainer of a computer program do, given a limited budget of time=money?
A. Fix bugs in components that end users often use
B. Fix bugs in components that end users seldom use
If you guessed "A", then the next step is to measure which features end users often use. Telemetry does this. Even GNU/Linux distributions have this sort of thing, such as the optional popularity-contest package in Debian and Ubuntu. I think Microsoft forces it on as a condition of support so that users can't disable telemetry and then turn around and complain that this or that feature is broken or is being removed from the system.
Can Explorer show me folder sizes yet?
Would it be acceptable for folder sizes in a file manager to initially appear as a throbber and then be replaced with the actual size after several seconds of HDD thrashing? Or would you prefer that a file manager hide the contents of a folder entirely until it has run the equivalent of du to query all folders within that folder for their sizes? On any Linux distribution, try time du on your home directory after a fresh reboot. And what value would you prefer that a file manager show for the size of the folder if the current user lacks permission to traverse some subfolder?
Microsoft has never claimed anyone is going to buy Windows purely to run WSL.
Even if Microsoft has not claimed so, a few some Slashdot users have. When asked what Linux laptop to use in size ranges that System76 doesn't cover, particularly smaller than 13", I seem to remember a few users replying suggesting buying a Windows laptop and running WSL.
Last I checked, Wine required an X server, and Microsoft didn't provide one for WSL. Nor has the free version of Xming been updated in over a decade.
Or are you referring to running Linux on the bare metal and running applications in Wine? That works so long as Linux and X.Org support your PC's hardware. Though some PCs work better with Linux, others work better with Windows, sometimes fairly spectacularly.
Wow. Where to start.
Linux is not a second-class citizen that needs to ride on the back of Microsoft Windows.
It doesn't. Linux isn't running anywhere. Windows Subsystem for Linux is all about not running Linux AT ALL, but giving Windows users access to Linux userland apps.
It's insulting that Microsoft claims that enterprises are asking for this.
Then you should blame the enterprises for your insult. The same enterprises who spin up 40% of Azure instances not because they give a shit about Linux, but rather to access software that only runs on Linux.
Any enterprise that uses Linux know, Linux stands on its own.
Of course it does, but for what reason? Very few enterprises use Linux because Linux. They use Linux because Apache or some other killer application. Enterprises grit their teeth at running things like IIS but often do so anyway because Windows has no alternative in many parts of the enterprise sector. WSL is specifically targeting these groups. Pretending like they don't exist is just sheer stupidity.
Any Linux distro that partners this way tarnishes the years of development effort of thousands of developers
Any distro that makes themselves more accessible tarnishes themselves? In the eyes of who? You and Richard Stallman? Guess what, most people don't give a shit.
Embrace. Extend. Extinguish.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
Which of the following would you prefer that the maintainer of a computer program do, given a limited budget of time=money?
A. Fix bugs in components that end users often use
B. Fix bugs in components that end users seldom use
You DO realize that the choice is NOT mutually exclusive, right?
It is when a publisher has a limited amount of money to spend on hiring people to fix bugs.
So how did they manage for the past 30 years without Telemetry???
By charging more. I seem to remember Windows 7 retail being more expensive at launch than Windows 10 retail was at launch. Charging more led some PC makers to try loading GNU/Linux onto ultra-low-cost PCs. In addition, Windows 7 had fewer features to maintain than Windows 10, though I admit fewer antifeatures as well. There was no UWP in Windows 7, for instance.
* Opt-in is fine.
* Opt-out is bullshit.
Would you prefer that your computer be attacked by a botnet of people who failed to opt-in to security updates?
Do you even understand what a bug report is?
First, the information sent along with the bug report is a form of telemetry. Second, proactive reports that a package is still in use prevent the maintainer from removing a rarely downloaded package from the repository and having to field bug reports to reinstate the package.
Based on what I've already read, I'm under the impression that the WSL container doesn't give applications enough privileges to access the video hardware, which would be required to run an X server inside WSL.
Or were you referring to running the X server in the Win32 environment and allowing WSL applications to connect to it? This is the approach taken by Xming, but its free version hasn't been updated in a decade.
Good Linux GUI software is cross platform
True, but running this software on Linux still has benefits.
Telemetry What's better: GIMP on X11/Linux or GIMP on a copy of Windows that exfiltrates your usage habits to Microsoft for use in displaying advertisements for things you just already bought? Unlike telemetry in Windows 10, telemetry in Linux distributions is optional and, even if enabled, no finer than which packages are used. Predictable reboots What's better: Firefox on X11/Linux or Firefox on a copy of Windows that periodically loses unsaved work on a suspended PC when it reboots overnight? Unlike reboots in Windows 10, reboots in Linux distributions don't happen automatically. True, one might argue that the real problem to fix is that work is unsaved in the first place. But some people hold off on saving because applications fail to provide "Undo Save" or "Save Untitled Document But Keep It Untitled And Reopen It After Restart" options. Predictable Internet data transfer quota usage What's better: LibreOffice on X11/Linux or LibreOffice on a copy of Windows that eats up your satellite Internet provider's data transfer quota for the month downloading a 3 GB semiannual update without warning? At least with Linux, you have a chance to drive into town to perform the download on unmetered Wi-Fi in a library or restaurant, and home and small office users have the option to follow a long-term-support (LTS) branch, which is biennial (24 months) rather than semiannual (6 months)."Linux is not a second-class citizen that needs to ride on the back of Microsoft Windows. It's insulting that Microsoft claims that enterprises are asking for this."
Insulting as it may look, enterprises do ask for things like these, sometimes explicitly, sometimes without even knowing.
Corporations are not thinking entities to start with, so within them there are lots of different trends pushing on different directions.
Just as an example, I'm lucky enough that my work system is Linux (Ubuntu: nobody is perfect) and parts of the company know that's good because it is Linux what we develop for (Red Hat, but hey...) and because it enhances at least part of their developers morale (i.e.: me).
But then, another part of the company is continuosly pressing we should use the "corporate blessed image" that, you know what? is Windows-based; whenever new internal services get deployed, Linux is an afterthought at best (which means, more times doesn't work than do); the VPN (critical for off-hours support) is Windows-only, etc.
What do you think will happen the day a sales drone can come with a more or less convincingly case the shows *on paper* (just as it's usually the case for Microsoft products) that the company can get "the best of both worlds", the corporate fuzzy feeling of using Windows plus the (presumed) effect of happy developers?
You go that far back in history and failed to mention the Halloween documents.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Sorry. I'll always want to run Windows over Linux. Putting the end user and the desktop experience first won though. It won despite activation and forced updates. it won despite gross privacy violations.
I'd love to run Qubes or Ubuntu with Windows in a container. The whole culture would have to change, though.
You should have stopped immediately after "I have no idea."
You said "the target audience," but you meant "people who are NOT the target audience." Anyone who believes what you said, is not the target audience for WSL.
to kick Linux out of the door: you donâ(TM)t need Linux, you have WSL. Goodbye Linux in the âoeenterpriseâ environment..
Can I suggest you check out DomTerm? It has the functionality of gnome-terminal (and then some) but does not require an X-server. Instead, it uses Electron, which (in my biased opinion) makes for a very nice interface. This article focuses on DomTerm on WSL. The release page includes pre-compiled WSL binaries.
"Linux syscalls work..."
I have tmux (and screen) which I use for running weechat, znc, vim, emacs , building various projects, what ever, you name it ... getting access to all the power tools of bash & scripting along with various tradition unix tools such as find, grep, diff to name a few. I also have xming or I can run X inside ssh for GUI. running a VM is more performance costly and cumbersome in various ways. i dont even have to learn MS's powershell/vb/whatever scripting language and innuendo as I can use my linux skills and trust linux solidity and simplicity to work for me. I can always leave that tmux session and run a game or use a windows flavor of an app.
With AutoHotkey I have even more power that enables me to feel less and less dependent on MS's quirks and mouse point and click.
They have the ability for Windows and Linux to communicate with each other directly, allowing you to pipe Linux output to a Windows program and vice versa. Hence some Linux tools and solutions could require Windows going forward in order to work.