Linux on Windows 10

[sebt3]

Umm... okay, no idea what use that would have.

*I* would/will use this. Cygwin is a pain in the harsh to use. winscp and putty are nice, but having a native port of openssh on windows mean awesomeness. Beside, it is being said that the normal linux binaries will works. This mean that the windows kernel have support for x86 ELF files (linux binaries) meaning a very new level of compatibility. Install Xming and be prepared to have some surprises

And I can not replace my Windows 10 desktop... I'd love to have my Windows 10 running with KDE as DE, but that most probably won't work with that tool as well.

Errr wrong... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_alternative_shells_for_Windows if you have a win7 copy laying near, you could run plasma on it

 

[EvilDragon]

it's for developers. They can use bash and package management from the command line. This is not for GUI apps.

But isn't bash already available for Windows?
I know I got other useful Linux command line tools for Windows already.

 

[EvilDragon]

Errr wrong... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_alternative_shells_for_Windows if you have a win7 copy laying near, you could run plasma on it

But that's still running on top of Windows default DE, right?
Then it would be double bloat.
I'd love to get rid of the Windows UI...

I tried KDE4Win years ago, but wasn't really working that well.

 

[rygD]

But isn't bash already available for Windows?
I know I got other useful Linux command line tools for Windows already.

There is something a few people I know use that does something like that. I can't recall the name right now, but they tried talking me into using it. Due to potential future plans I didn't want to become reliant on something I won't be able to use later. It looked useful during the 2 minutes it was shown to me.

 

[ekianjo]

But isn't bash already available for Windows?

Not really. Cygwin kind of enables that, but this is completely different here. The bash implementation by Ubuntu and Microsoft has direct access to Windows' internal APIs. So for example top would show the running windows processes as it it was a "native windows" application.

 

[levi]

For developing Windows apps, linux+mingw > windows+this IMO. But maybe that's just me.

 

[Klumpen]

The whole thing reminds me a bit of Microsoft's EEE (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish)

That's all there is about this.

 

[FBnil]

The whole thing reminds me a bit of Microsoft's EEE

yet this person has totally given up on using Linux now

Exactly that... if it only exposes the commandline, then the experience will be more negative. If they already know cmd and powershell, then... its weird re-learning all the commands.
Features like tab-expansion now are default in Windows... so they do not see those win.

 

[PowerGod]

So, they finally made a proprietary/closed source bash

 

[Christoph.Krn]

winscp and putty are nice, but having a native port of openssh on windows mean awesomeness.

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/powershell/2015/10/19/openssh-for-windows-update/

 

[comradekingu]

I think this effort fell short of actually putting the Linux kernel on Windows, so Linux on Windows it isn't.

 

[lukey]

They should have put the effort into wine...

 

[_jr_]

I think this effort fell short of actually putting the Linux kernel on Windows, so Linux on Windows it isn't.

Available information is scarce. It remains to be seen how compatible the syscall translation will be and (perhaps more importantly) how often it will be updated. According to the article, cygwin will currently work better (e.g. tty compatibility).

 

[levi]

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/powershell/2015/10/19/openssh-for-windows-update/

Yes, I remember that announcement. Nice to get an update. I'm a little unclear what 'address POSIX compatibility concerns' is - I don't know if powershell claims to be POSIX compliant, but I'd expect on sshing in to a windows box to get powershell's own implementation of pipes and processes and so on. I recall that Windows NT could be configured to be posixly correct somehow back in the 3.51/4 days, but I don't recall ever seeing that in actuality.

 

[ekianjo]

I think this effort fell short of actually putting the Linux kernel on Windows, so Linux on Windows it isn't.

it's not Linux on Windows, it's more like linux tools on Windows, which is close enough. If you wanted Linux on Windows, you only need a VM.
[doublepost=1459467553,1459467510][/doublepost]

So, they finally made a proprietary/closed source bash

No, what's closed source is the link between bash and the Windows API. Which is not the same thing at all.

 

[Asaggynoodle]

But that's still running on top of Windows default DE, right?
Then it would be double bloat.
I'd love to get rid of the Windows UI...

I tried KDE4Win years ago, but wasn't really working that well.

It's a mess to replace the shell on anything that's NT based. There was some project for XP many light years ago that was amazing, I cannot recall the name, Litestep? I just recall it looked like WindowMaker which I loved.
The only REAL shell replacement for windows that worked and was reliable, was Calmira, a Legit true replacement.

Of course, You could always use the Open Source Alternative to Windows-- ReactOS? That way you get the best of both worlds, Windows x86 software/driver Compatibility, and Open Source.

 

[Neelix]

I think this effort fell short of actually putting the Linux kernel on Windows, so Linux on Windows it isn't.

it's not Linux on Windows, it's more like linux tools on Windows, which is close enough. If you wanted Linux on Windows, you only need a VM.

Isn't that the exact situation the FSF was trying to avoid when it insisted on the use of the name GNU/Linux?
To be fair, the collection of tools included is more than just GNU, but I suspect that if there was ever a situation where it was more appropriate to use "GNU" than "Linux" this is it.

-Neelix

 

[comradekingu]

I think GNU≠Windows is what this is.

 

[rygD]

I think GNU≠Windows is what this is.

How will you say that when speaking?

I am still going to call it GNU/Windows. People are more likely to be confused if I do that. While it may not be technically accurate, calling it or describing it in any way with "Linux" is totally inaccurate (because Android is a lot more Linux than this thing will be, and we don't call it Linux). Stallman was right, we all should have listened. Plus I just want to mess with people.

 

[comradekingu]

Gnu inequality Windows ?
Android is Android/linux. Linux can be totally different from GNU/Linux. As with set-top boxen and some routers for example.

Topic: While not important to me now, I did use linux|gnu userland tools in Windows to lessen the transition when I switched,