Linux On Windows - The Thin End Of The Wedge? 268
AYeomans writes: "LINE version 0.3 has just been released.'LINE is a utility which executes unmodified Linux applications on Windows by intercepting Linux system calls. The Linux applications themselves are not emulated. They run directly on the CPU just like all other Windows applications.' Could this be the thin end, to which the Linux wedge is attached, allowing people currently tied to Windows the opportunity of easily using native Linux applications?" I wonder how many Windows users are actively waiting for Linux programs to use. (TuxRacer one day maybe?) The version number is low but this is an interesting, oddball project.
Re:unnecessary tools? (Score:2)
We're not talking color laser printers, inkjets or anything else you might be thinking of... When people talk about the need for CMYK and Pantone support they're talking about outputting their creations to film, delivering said film to an offset or web printer and having said printer image printing plates, which then transfers ink to the paper...
Re:wow! (Score:1)
THE ONE ABOUT THE OPERATING SYMPTOMS (Score:1)
Re:industry standards (Score:2)
...Not to mention that Photoshop carries a pretty hefty price tag, while the GIMP is free, free, free.
The GIMP is plenty fun for pure wanking around, or doing projects that aren't intended for printing. But Photoship is indeed the tool of choice for our still-not-paperless society.
-----
"You owe me a case of beer. Sucka'."
Woooah! (Score:1)
Wooah! Somebody woke up hungover and hasn't had there coffee yet!
It's okay, I'm there with ya bud...
Re:This can only hurt Linux (Score:1)
why? why? why? (Score:1)
why?
One of the great things about linux is that you compile apps *for* *your* *own* *system*, which makes them faster. I'd have thought that a complete set of linux
Let's give credit... (Score:3)
Regardless of what you think of the idea, looks like some real smart people have pulled off something cool.
'Course Wine might have moved this fast with the Windows source code, but still...
Re:Linux ICQ clones (Score:1)
Thats just me though.
LINE requires Cygwin (Score:3)
--
Re:Anyone tried to run... (Score:2)
Not that we've done anything that silly, no, not us...
cygwin (Score:2)
cygwin [cygwin.com] rocks. If your boss forces you to develop on Windows NT, just install cygwin and suddenly it is a Unix development environment! Beautiful.
Likewise, if you are developing a GPL-compatible application and you want it to run on Windows as well as on Unix, just compile it with cygwin and ship it! (If it is not GPL-compatible, then you have to buy a license from Cygnus. An interesting business model.)
Cygwin is very mature. I was using it 18 months ago for full-time development environment on Windows NT 4.
Regards,
Zooko
Re:This can only hurt Linux (Score:1)
Re:good luck! (Score:1)
So... (Score:1)
Re:Ahhhhahaha! (Score:1)
Please name the superior Linux equivilant to the following software:
Office
IE 5.5
Photoshop
Windows Media Player
Diablo 2
Didn't think so.
No. (Score:1)
Re:This can only hurt Linux (Score:1)
For example, ever wonder why all the icons on the desktop & taskbar redraw from time to time? Or why your icons display the wrong pictures for an app? These are both the result of a crash in Windows where it recovers & restarts again.
Most Windows users don't really recognize how much havoc is going on behind the scenes.
Unfortunately, the fact that Windows does catch a lot of things is a mixed blessing. It is good that a small error can easily be caught before you lose that important work. It is bad because it doesn't put enough pressure on Microsoft to fix these problems in new versions of Windows.
The thing I worry about is that since Linux operates much differently than Windows it will give a perception to potential Linux converts that Linux is less stable.
Wow, now I can swith to Windows! (Score:2)
Re:priorities (Score:2)
I have a PC with a Diamond Sonic Impact S70 and Matrox G400.
When I install Windows 98, the sound card is NOT recognised and the G400 is merely a fast VGA card at this stage. I have to then install the sound card driver and the Matrox driver to get them working fully.
In comes Linux, Boot of a Linux CD (choose what you like: Debian, Mandrake, Red Hat, SuSE, Caldera, Corel, Turbo, etc, etc), the G400 is found and X is configured for it, as is the sound, without so much as a "huh?" from Linux.
Whats more, Linux has'nt crashed on me in 4 years! Which is why Debian will be going on my new Dell Inspiron 8000 G850U, once I get it. Windows on the other hand will merely be one of the multitudes of apps that I will be launching from a glorious X set up.
Re:This can only hurt Linux (Score:2)
<p>I even recently had to answer a newbie who said <i>"Why does Netscape and Mozilla keep crashing all the time? Wasn't Linux supposed to be more stable, advanced etc? IE never crashed on me as much."</i>. Obviously, he didn't draw the line between kernel and third-party applications.
All kidding aside... (Score:4)
My windows 2000 desktop is rock solid. Machines that I've built myself aren't that great with windows, but my Dell never crashes. I think windows is pickier about hardware than linux.
I run linux (and BSD now) for the applications. Things like sendmail and apache, mutt, vim, and fetchmail.
Exchange might be a wonderful package (never used it), but it's expensive, and I'm running email for my own personal domain, not an enterprise -- so the thousands of dollars 2000 Server and Exchange would cost are out of the question. Outlook does a lot of nice stuff, but it won't let me read the headers (at least I haven't figured out how), things like that. Too much hand holding.
The problem with unix apps like sendmail is the learning curve. Once you know it, it really is good stuff, especially when it's free.
The whole idea that w2k isn't solid for a desktop is just silly, and the argument will only be taken seriously when you're preaching to the choir at places like
But at the same time, the idea that stability is the only drawing card of linux is silly too. Unix is simple, it's clean, and it's easy to use, once you've climbed up a bit on the learning curve. It's more than clean, it's elegant. And a lot of the apps are key -- if you want to run NAT, if you want to handle your email, if you want to filter net traffic, Linux or BSD is the way to go.
I'm not sure this particular software will be that useful -- it really makes more sense to me to just have two machines.
I've been looking for a program like this (Score:1)
Ummmm...you must not be paying attention (Score:1)
LINE is priceless! (Score:1)
having a single executable enviorment that runs
unmodfied on BSD, Linux and Windows.
This is an alternative API which is truly cross
platform - binary compatiable for x86 and compile
compatiable with almost everything else.(S/390 anyone?)
This could mean that the Linux API may become
the France Lingua of virtual machines.
A true "write once, run anywhere" the way JAVA
and
Of course, there are many problems to overcome (GUI - X is not a normal part of Win* installs)
but if they are solved we may do unto Windows
what it once did to OS/2 - since OS/2 ran Windows
apps, none wrote for OS/2.
LINE is one cool hack for the hackers that wrote it, but one huge leap for Wolrd Domination
Why? (Score:1)
Re:Love to see a fork (Score:3)
Windows does not have any concept of a fork.
Well, maybe not exactly...
"The CreateProcess [microsoft.com] function creates a new process, which runs independently of the creating process. The function provides two methods for identifying the program to be executed. ..."
Re:This can only hurt Linux (Score:2)
So either Quincy is broken (or over sensative), or there's something going on under the hood of Windows that isn't pretty. Note that I haven't seen this on NT, only older mucked-up 9x installs.
Re:perceptions (Score:2)
Re:What a TERRIFIC idea! (Score:2)
While there shouldn't be a difference between Windows and *nix versions of Apache, if I'm developing/testing commercial software, I want to keep my environment consistent.
Sorry for my unclear post.
Confessions of a windows user (Score:2)
Play DVDs
Rip DVDs / encode to DivX
Play DivX
(As best I can tell, Wine support for directshow filters and a DVD ASPI layer would solve those)
Games would be nice, but I don't use them that much and I'm not too picky. Get a few of the popular ones working (including something by blizzard), I don't really care which, I'll be happy.
Oh, and linux NEEDS A BETTER WEB BROWSER!!! Netscape and mozilla are both slow, they do a poor job with dialog boxes, drop down menus, text boxes, etc. Haven't tried Konqueror, but I doubt it's all *that* much better. I do like the better cookie/ad managment under the various linux browsers though.
MP3 playing linux does a fine job with.
Word processing I can deal with star office. I really do prefer MS office for anything of a size I will ever do in the near future though.
So basically, I need Wine better before I switch, not the other way round. I don't plan to even try this out.
Re:Linux ICQ clones (Score:2)
Re:Double standard? No. (Score:5)
WINE: Good for users because you can use Windows applications on Linux.
LINE: Good for users because you can use Linux applications on Windows.
The problem some people having with the Windows part of this is that they want to see Linux do better. Users don't care which does better. They just want more and better choices, and LINE gives them another choice. Open source doesn't empower users (not directly anyway) because they can't modify source (most of them are not programmers). Additional choices empower the users, because they are all capable of making choices.
Headers in Outlook - Offtopic (Score:2)
Headers will be located at the bottom.
Leave it to Microsoft to put it in the most unthought of place.
Re:Double standard? No. (Score:3)
Now WINE on the other hand, I could see getting some slack from Microsoft. WINE still encourages the use of Microsoft products on the Application side. When Microsoft gets broken up, the Application side is where the real market dominance will show. The OS doesn't matter, it's transparent to the end user, use whatever you want, but the work? The data formats? All the things a _user_ will deal with? They will be Microsoft. As computer usage grows, Microsoft cares more about mindshare than it's OS. Let the technophiles use whatever OS they wish. The PHB and the average Joe don't care what OS they use as long as they know how to use the Apps. And Microsoft has by FAR the largest user base of all the application vendors.
Most people don't understand, Microsoft's future isn't in the OS, it's in the applications. It's in
Steven
Not at all Fucked up (Score:2)
If an application is 'only' a "linux" application, such an ability will allow the user to remain on the superior Windows platform. They get to run thier 'linux' app, and do not have to worry about the user having to make a choice about switching.
From the 'good for Linux POV'
This will allow people who are afraid of the concept of linux to see that it does not byte
From the 'about time POV'
Given 180+ linux distros, BSD/SCO/Solaris/QNX/etc la, the declaration of the X86Open group that "the standard for interoperability is Linux ELF" perhaps vendors will get their collective crainums extracted from their rectums and decide that:
1) The don't need the infighting LSB whiners to agree on a 'common' platform.
2) Vendors make sure the code runs on systems like FreeBSD (which runs Linux binaries FASTER than Linux distos do), SCO, Solaris and projects like LINE. If they run there, and don't run on the your chosen version of the 180+ linux disro, the distro you have is broken. (if the people doing "linux compatibility" can get faster execution speeds and run big hunks of complex code like Oracle and VMware, they've done their homework)
3) Vendors then offer FORMAL support for the SCO/Solaris/BSD users, just like they would offer for RedHat.
Re:Double standard? No. (Score:2)
Steven
Re:What a TERRIFIC idea! (Score:2)
I can't wait till this is do able!
Re:What a TERRIFIC idea! (Score:2)
(PostgreSQL 7.1 also compiles under cygwin without patches. Cygwin rocks.)
Dear nerd: speak for yourself (Score:2)
Sorry, but there is a plethora of Linux apps that I am itching for when I have to work on a Windows box, or when I have to work with other Windows users.
Every once in a while some clueless bloke like you comes up to me asking "how can I do this-and-that?" Now I am very willing to explain such stuff.
"How can I set up a local server to test my PHP and CGI scripts [which use Sendmail and MySQL along the road]?"
"Oh, that's easy. Just install the Apache package, the PHP module and MySQL."
"...on my Windows box?"
"Oh. wait. Uhh... I know of some small free Web server for Windows that does CGI, but PHP and MySQL... hrm."
From a Mac user with a stupid FTP program: "So how can I resolve these carriage return upload problems?"
"Try ASCII upload."
"My program knows Text, MacText, BinHex [etc.], but no ASCII. Which one should I choose?"
"?? Try all of them for what I care."
"Not one worked OK. Now what?"
"Sigh. [dreaming of installing DebianPPC on that thing]"
I happen to have a couple of 100 more of these anecdotes. Whenever I am forced to work with a Windows box, I have my Linux box running as well, if possible, and through OpenSSH, smbclient, VNC, WINE and other stuff I can finally do what I have to do on that Windows box.
I am mostly using Word and Netscape on the Windows box to a) make my homework and b) do something while making my homework. But the Linux box is always there for the kewl stuff and for the programming.
It just happens to be so that Windows doesn't interoperate as well with Linux as is the other way around. In other words, when working with Windows, I _miss_ all kinds of Linux' functionalities. So YES, I am _very_ glad that Windows now finally gets some better Linux interoptability - one that doesn't require a reboot into Linux!
BTW, if you're seriously thinking that Linux folks aren't working hard on improving their "pieces of shit" evey day, *I DARE YOU* to keep up with Debian Unstable. Hehe
It's... It's...
Anything that lets users see open source is good. (Score:2)
That means of course that whatever software escapes down the LINE has to be visibly supported otherwise, there's no point.
A nice little app that get out to the Windows community, say a little calendar thingy, that would grow as people use it and provide feed back or code mods would be absolutely great and very visible feed back to hang Redmond with.
Re:Double standard? No. (Score:2)
That's the problem for Microsoft: Closed source apps where they original company has gone out of business that force them to choose between having backwards compatability longer than they want, or preventing the users from upgrading, thus reducing their revenue source.
The large number of Windows 3.1 installations out there is a good demonstration of that principle.
Re:Let's give credit... (Score:2)
Re:Why not just use VMware? (Score:2)
And you really need twice as much RAM to run Linux in VmWare on Windows because you have both kernels in memory.
----
This can only hurt Linux (Score:5)
--
Re:Uhhhh (Score:2)
So, what's your point? Think of Cygwin as a "Unix [class] library". It's no different than using MFC or any portable library. Using Cygwin doesn't make TuxRacer any less of a Windows program. It's like saying that a game compiled with DJGPP & Allegro isn't a DOS program.
If it bothers you that it uses Cygwin, why not try compiling it with Mingw instead? Then it wouldn't need cygwin.dll, just the C DLLs that Microsoft distributes with Windows.
Re:Anyone tried to run... (Score:2)
Of course, you could run LINE using WINE on a Linux box?
I'll use it. Here's why: (Score:2)
What this project gives me is the ability to standardize all my environments on a set of good, free apps - Linux apps.
--
Developer choice != consumers choice (Score:2)
This could be an important foot in the door, allowing people to develop on Linux and deploy on windows (taking much of the programming frustration associated with developing under windows -- oh the humanity of it all! Memories best left repressed -- out of the picture). Potentially quicker development cycles not held hostage by Microsoft release schedules and instant deployment to two popular platforms could make for a very potent combination that can well favor platforms such as Linux.
Anyone tried to run... (Score:3)
Uhhhh (Score:4)
Re:I've been looking for a program like this (Score:4)
Alternatively, you can run VNC on the Linux box together with the app, and let them use a VNC client or even a webbrowser (with Java) to get access to the application that way.
Ahhhhahaha! (Score:5)
Timmy! Have you forgotten? (Score:2)
You're WRONG! TuxRacer 0.61 runs perfectly on Windows! See?!?! [tuxracer.com]
What a TERRIFIC idea! (Score:3)
Wow, that's terrific, I sit here on my Win2K desktop, and I'm just thinking, "I love the OS for it's stability, if only I could natively run ALL those *nix applications!, then I'd have the perfect desktop".
</SARCASM>
In fairness, this is moderately useful, I could run Apache/PHP locally for development work on my standard desktop, but that's roughly where the usefullness ends. I mean, obviously the use for this isn't X-Windows applications, although with an X-Server running it would be.
While WINE is a useful project, this isn't. I give the people working on it props, it's a neat idea, and probably a fun hack, but doesn't seem terribly useful. I mean, while this is definitely different than the Cygwin project, I'm of the opinion that Cygwin provides 75%-85% of the benefits of a project like this, so the extra effort of this project isn't worth it to "the community". However, as it is worth it to the developers, good luck.
Re:This can only hurt Linux (Score:2)
Compared to Linux it's lightning fast. At least as far as X-apps go.
Re:priorities (Score:2)
Try instaling Linux 2.0.11 and see if your cards are automatically recognized. You'd see that the micro-kernel does have its benefits in the MS world. It might not optimize it but it lets you go online to get the newest drivers faster than using a dumb terminal to recompile.
Try not to worship Linux so much. It's not the Messiah.
Re:This can only hurt Linux (Score:2)
These are the result of GPFs that Win 9x has hidden from the user. The ususal solution is to disable the debugger (quincy -u or something).
The consipricy theory is that this is somewhat by design in Win9x -- it's supposed to deal with a lot of flakey drivers and 16-bit stuff and not totally croak. Of course, it contributes to the overall end-user experience that Windows in slow and unpredictable.
Re:Ahhhhahaha! (Score:2)
And then, at some point, I "lost", which apparently translates to: "I feel my argument is superior to yours and my software is superior to yours so stop arguing about it and let me live in peaceful bliss". And, if one had only said so originally, I would be happy to oblige.
The notion that "UNIX has no software", put forth (apparently) in joke fashion is what started this thread in the first place. My experience is the opposite, and I have yet to be convinced otherwise - at least for my needs. If you feel Windows has all the software for your needs and UNIX does not, kindly say so - but don't assume that holds for everybody.
And no, none of this is serious enough to have "winners" or "losers" declared. It's all just discussion, opinion and a pile of bits that all involved will soon forget. None of it is worth getting worked-up over whatsoever.
Finally... (Score:5)
At long last, the stability of windows with the broad application base of Linux -- we could make a less useful computer if we really put our minds to it!...
---------------------------------------------
Re:Headers in Outlook - Offtopic (Score:2)
Re:All kidding aside... (Score:2)
I use W2K on my work box (Pentium III 677, 512 MB RAM, GeForce2). I use it pretty heavily for development, and it's VERY stable. I was doing exactly the same stuff on Win98 a few months back, and it froze up, crashed etc, required rebooting, on average 2 to 5 times a day. But with W2K it's truly "rock solid".
I must say though W2K on my home machine (Celeron 333, 128MB, TNT) did *not* go down well. The setup was flaky from the start. There was in particular a lot of problems with sockets - every time I went online, the thing would mess up after an hour or two and refuse to create any new connections until I rebooted. I would have the occasional complete lockup (while doing OpenGL development.) Generally there were problems. I'm currently only using Linux on that machine.
The motherboards for the two machines are the same brand but different models (earlier version on the celeron system), so my suspicion is that perhaps there was some problem with W2K not liking the earlier motherboard. Both had latest M/B drivers.
Re:All kidding aside... (Score:2)
Even windows 95/98 never gave me problems with crashes
You don't use your system for C++ (and/or DirectX) development, do you?
Geez, when I was doing DirectX programming on Win98 I had to reboot on average 2 to 5 times a day, and it was *extremely* rare (e.g. maybe once a month) that I managed a whole day without a reboot. I'm now doing the same work on W2K (on exactly the same hardware, so don't give me the "hardware problem" BS story) and it's been 100% stable. Win9X is a f%#^$@# pile of stinking, rotten sh&*@#. Not proper use of protected mode, combined with a Win16Mutex == crap.
Name One (Score:2)
Just another geek toy (Score:3)
Okay, this seems to me like a pretty damn pointless application, the sort of thing that programmers churn out just to practice their programming skills rather than produce anything truly useful.
Think about it - you can already get most of the essential Linux tools over at Cygwin [cygwin.com] if you're after better command line tools. Otherwise, what does Linux have to offer? Most Linux software is perpetual alphaware or just a rehash of other projects (witness the truly scary number of CD front-ends out there). These programs already have free native Windows equivalents out there, and the Windows ones have often been in development longer (the big Linux bandwagon wasn't all that long ago) and can take advantage of Windows features.
And out of the few open sourced packages that are approaching professional quality, many of them are already available on Windows, like Apache. Sure there's the GIMP, but Windows users using Photoshop aren't going to want to change, and PaintShop Pro is pretty much the package of choice for low-end use.
I just don't see that there's any real use for this.
The circle (Score:2)
(shut up, I know [vim.org], it was a joke).
Now if only someone will write a HOWTO on compiling your kernel under Windows...
-
Just like the old days (Score:2)
For those who miss blue screens.
Now you can get them while running linux applications.
Pressure on Cygwin (Score:2)
Just cool... (Score:4)
The only thing that matters is that its just so COOL. I say it again: Its just cool!
Warphal
It's about the OS, not the apps (Score:2)
What's the point? (Score:4)
Also, it's obvious that the author doesn't really know what he's talking about because:
1) - There is a version of GIMP that has been ported to Windows. [gimp.org] 2) - There is a TuxRacer version for Windows. [tuxracer.com]
Also, I tend to think that the apps on linux mostly suck when you are using linux as a desktop. Server applications are where linux shines, and if you were going to run something like apache webserver, why not just use the linux version on linux, or the windows version on windows?
Anyways, I think this could be an interesting project, but it's no holy grail to get people to start using linux apps since the applications for Windows are usually superior. It's the OS that everyone hates, not the applications (well, some of the applications too.)
imagine the possibilities (Score:2)
or run either win or *nix on various platforms strictly by emulation...
hmm....
Set up a joint configuration with WINE, then... (Score:2)
In particular, you could make sure that your important apps never stop working as you transition, because you could install and test WINE while still running Windows; once everything works, you can just switch which kernel you're actually running and which you're emulating, and keep working.
Why Line when so many native Windows ports exist? (Score:2)
Due to the generally more open nature of programming for Linux and Unix in general over Windows, Windows already gets to benefit from the good apps being ported over to it. The makers of Perl, Apache, Gcc, and whatnot aren't trying to create artificial scarcity to force users onto UNIX with them. (As is usual, Microsoft benefits from the goodwill of others without having the common polite decency to reciprocate on occasion. I believe the technical term for this is "mooching".)
Anyway, I have to wonder how much demand for Line there will be when many of the good apps on UNIX are already portable to Windows as it is.
Potential FUD trouble (Score:3)
Then, I bet you'll be hearing people say "Hey, you can run all Linux apps on Windows but just sone Windows apps on Linux!! Why use Linux??"
Re:Love to see a fork (Score:2)
That's an interesting example. Four new processes just to do an assignment, an append, and a case conversion? That's pretty inefficient. No language except a Unix-influence shell would make you do that.
It's more obvious on Win32, but spawning a lot of unnecessary processes would also be a bad idea on many Linux applications. The extra overhead isn't a big deal if the script is just a command line utility. But what about web applications? Database servers? For serious modern apps, forking is evil.
I'm not a Win32 expert, but if I were I would probably say, "Heavy forking apps are obsolete. It doesn't make sense for Win32 to even try to support them. Better to concentrate on multithreading."
__________________
Re:What's the point? (Score:2)
Have you ever actually played the Windows version of TuxRacer? It crashes on 4/5 runs down the slope. Completely unplayable.
I read this story and immediate thought: "AHA! Now I can actually _play_ tux-racer!!".
Re:Finally... (Score:5)
Re:All kidding aside... (Score:2)
Linux ICQ clones (Score:3)
Nice idea, but tough in one regard (Score:2)
I do wonder how practical and successful this will be for running many applications, though. How will it deal with Win32's lack of a POSIX base? How will programs that rely on filename case-sensitivity and Unix-style file permissions and setuid issues, for starters, cope? Not many easy answers, especially if they're targeting Win98/ME and not just NT/Win2K.
one word... (Score:2)
Yes, I know there's a windoze port of it, but with ALL respect to the guy(s) who slave at porting it (and theres alot of respect), its just too big for a few guys. This could mean runnin the latest version(s) of gimp when they're released rather than waiting for the guys to port it.
-----
If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed...
Re:All kidding aside... (Score:2)
Dell is nothing compared to the stuff that Compaq does to windows. I've seen compaq systems that won't even BOOT without using Compaq's version of windows because they screw around with so much of the hardware support...
---------------------------------------------
Wow. (Score:2)
How is this any different than wine? HMM? The tables are just reversed.
Who cares if YOU have no use for it, someone else might.
Re:Confessions of a windows user (Score:2)
Actuallly is a good idea (Score:2)
A good example, lots of Slashdotters are always talking about using Evolution as an Outlook replacement. The problem is that there is no Windows version of Evolution. That means either running Evolution on *nix desktops and still running Outlook on Windows desktops, or replacing all of your Windows desktops with *nix desktops. While I love the idea of replacing Windows desktops with *nix systems, replacing your OS just to get rid of Outlook is pretty silly. With this program, an IT guy like me could load Evolution on *all* of the desktops (*nix or Windows) in the company and get rid of Outlook completely!!!!!!
Maybe Not Completely Pointless (Score:2)
But, now that I think about it for a moment, most of that broad Linux application base is released under the GPL or some other free (beer|speech) license, whereas a lot of the useful Windows apps aren't. I could easily see a lot of college students who don't feel like shelling out for Adobe but also don't want to switch to Linux using this to run the Gimp, for instance.
(The Gimp may actually run on Windows already; I wouldn't know. That was just an example.)
--
John Hyland
Backend Coder and Kung Foo Master
Re:About time...Wait a minute, that already exists (Score:4)
Ever heard of Cygwin [cygwin.com]? It's a pretty damned fine piece of kit. It understands the way UNIX people work, and all that Windows stupidity at the same time. Brilliant, I say.
Wes
--
Great for advancing Linux Acceptance -- (Score:5)
As I write this, the link to the information has been slashdotted out of existence, so I'll have to make some assumptions.
First of all is the fact that this is going to have to intercept pretty much all file-system calls and do some pretty damn nifty conversion to get the different shells to work properly. Heaven help you if you try to chmod kernel32.dll or something like that... ^_^
Second is the fact that this is going to be a popular program amoung 'amature' hackers, and people who consider themselves hackers because they know a little more about their workstation than the guy in the next cube. For every guy who manages to get 'xeyes' to run, you're going to end up with two or three calls to any given IT department like this:
'My computer won't boot into Windows any more!'
'What did you do to it?'
'I tried to run linuxcfg, but it crashed and deleted my Windows directory when it couldn't find
'Hybrid' sytems are never fun to support.
If this works, however, and starts working reliably, it could be a great boon to getting certain apps ported over to Linux. If a Windoze software developer can run an app that will allow him to a compile a linux binary of his Windows program, it will start to open the door for a lot of 'effortless' porting work between the two OS's.
stuck on Windows (Score:3)
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | http://www.infamous.net/
This is the best thing to happen to Linux since... (Score:2)
So, I can have my cake and get instability, too? Awesome! I'll run all these sweet Linux ports of lame windoze apps and still be able to read .doc files! Rock on!
rid-ic-u-lop-a-thy [ridiculopathy.com]
Finally, no need for a VM (Score:3)
I think this is a Good Thing (TM)! It will give Linux applications more exposure. As people try all these new programs, they will beging to say "hey, with all this great stuff, I might as well completely switch to Linux!" Ok, maybe not.
I like it (cygwin) (Score:2)
Running linux apps under windows seems a lot less hassle to me than running windows apps under linux.
For me using windows as my basic opperating system has a lot of advantages:
I tend to use cygwin all the time and gives me the best of both worlds. If only someone would write a good vt100 terminal I'd be happy.
Re:What a TERRIFIC idea! (Score:2)
With (very) minor tweaking, I got glib, gtk+, and xchat compiled on it. With a little more work, I compiled everybuddy as well. I would have tried for Mozilla, but I was running out of space on that partition, so I just called it a night.
I'm pretty impressed with Cygwin; in fact, with a different X-Server, I'm sure I could get my roommate hooked on it. He wants something like Everybuddy for Windows, but they don't offer a Windows version. Little do they know that it compiles on Cygwin!
Anyhow, this LINE project sounds like a much simpler solution, except that "LINE requires Cygwin". And the page was still somewhat slashdotted when I got to it. But it'd be interesting to compare performance against Cygwin compiled binaries, or DJGPP...
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [ncsu.edu].
Re:Ahhhhahaha! (Score:2)
I just dare you to try running LyX on Windows. I know it's possible, but I wouldn't want to try it.
Can you get Broadcast 2000 for Windows? Is there an equivalent *free, open source* package?
Star Office runs much better on Linux than Windows, judging from what I've seen here.
Just because you can't run a few games, or an insipid office package...
Re:Double standard? No. (Score:2)
Re:industry standards (Score:2)
Apache? (Score:2)
Hrm, I've been running Apache on my windows desktop for years, it wasn't really hard, seening as how they've had a windows port available. You can get [php.net]php for windows as well.
Rate me on Picture-rate.com [picture-rate.com]
Re:Love to see a fork (Score:3)
I'll back that up -- Cygwin is an excellent product, but watching shell scripts that fly on UNIX grind to a halt under Cygwin is pretty soul destroying. Shell scripts by their very nature are constantly forking new processes, and something simple like:
$filename=`echo $pathname | sed 's/.*\///' | tr 'A-Z' 'a-z'`
... is likely to take a couple of *seconds* under Cygwin as it forks 4 new processes, compared to a blink of an eye on Linux (this is on the Pentium 200 Laptop I took to America, and didn't dare uninstall Windows from).
I bit the bullet and just had a coffee while scripts that should have taken seconds took half an hour: if I'd been willing to recode, I could have used Perl and got far better performance, but I'd *really* like a free way to run bash, sh, or ksh under Windows at respectable speeds.
--
Re:Ahhhhahaha! (Score:2)
Meanwhile, Linux is easier to use, easier to maintain, has better apps (for my use, anyway), better supported and costs a helluva lot less.