From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 52476 invoked by alias); 14 Apr 2016 23:09:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 52456 invoked by uid 89); 14 Apr 2016 23:09:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=joke, crap, This=e2, This?= X-HELO: etr-usa.com Received: from etr-usa.com (HELO etr-usa.com) (130.94.180.135) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 23:09:23 +0000 Received: (qmail 81480 invoked by uid 13447); 14 Apr 2016 23:09:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO polypore.west.etr-usa.com) ([73.26.17.49]) (envelope-sender ) by 130.94.180.135 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 14 Apr 2016 23:09:22 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: native Linux userland in Windows 10 From: Warren Young In-Reply-To: <1117668279.20160414220758@yandex.ru> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 23:09:00 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9B4C5920-2F0F-4D7C-A489-A6329679A1E8@etr-usa.com> References: <416uDmm4T7200S05.1460552179@web05.cms.usa.net> <84CCF5B5-9F11-4541-A527-FD0BD3AE5545@etr-usa.com> <1117668279.20160414220758@yandex.ru> To: cygwin@cygwin.com X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-04/txt/msg00353.txt.bz2 On Apr 14, 2016, at 1:07 PM, Andrey Repin wrote: >=20 >>> small things like cygpath >=20 >> A cygpath like facility is neither useful nor needed in UfW. >=20 > Which means, I can't call diff between files on my file manager's two pan= els? Sure you can. c:\tmp\foo.txt is seen as /mnt/c/tmp/foo.txt inside the UfW = box. That is, /mnt under UfW behaves much like /cygpath under Cygwin. The only difference between UfW and Cygwin in this regard is that UfW doesn= =E2=80=99t have any fallbacks for mixed-mode and DOS-style style paths. On= ly POSIX paths work, which is the recommended way of working with Cygwin, t= oo. Microsoft is bypassing one of the most troublesome areas of day-to-day= Cygwin use here by refusing to accept anything but POSIX paths. (Open question: does UfW=E2=80=99s Bash shell accept UNC paths?) >> Ubuntu with severe limitations >> is still highly useful; witness Raspian. >=20 > Raspian is an operating system. > This=E2=80=A6 this, I don't know how to call it, but it's a complete joke. Hyperbolic much? I=E2=80=99d say UfW checks off most of the defining characteristics of an O= S: there=E2=80=99s a separate kernel and userland, it does scheduling, medi= ates IPC, keeps processes from stomping on each other=E2=80=A6 About the o= nly thing it doesn=E2=80=99t do is privilege separation, but if that=E2=80= =99s a necessary qualification for a thing to be an OS, a Linux box booted = into single-user mode isn=E2=80=99t an OS, either. You could also think of it as a Linux personality on top of the NT microker= nel, and it=E2=80=99s the microkernel that=E2=80=99s the OS. >> A concrete example: All those soul-patch web developers choose to carry = Mac >> laptops not just because they=E2=80=99re the hipster choice, but because= Node runs >> much better under OS X than Windows. That proposition wholly changes in >> this UfW world: run node.js in the Ubuntu box and connect to it over the >> OS=E2=80=99s shared network stack from the Windows GUI browser of your c= hoice. >=20 > At the same time, you could run any given VM and get much better options = and > choices. You can make the same argument about Cygwin. And yet, despite the free ava= ilability of top-quality VM technology, Cygwin continues to thrive. UfW won=E2=80=99t fill 100% of the use cases of Cygwin from day 1, but for = a lot of cases, the two will be interchangeable, so that the choice between= them comes down to some practical consideration. setup.exe vs Windows Sto= re, Ubuntu package repo size vs Cygwin package repo size, native app speed = vs the Cygwin DLL POSIX emulation speed hit, native Windows interaction vs = siloed subsystems, etc. >> I expect it to be quite usable in a matter of months. >=20 > I wouldn't be so hasty. If there's no interfacing between subsystems, it = is as > useful as running a VM. Read: useless crap, when it is going to usability. Re: =E2=80=9Cuseless=E2=80=9D =E2=80=9CYou keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think = it means.=E2=80=9D =E2=80=94 Inigo Montoya >>> I just hope it does not interfere too much with my Cygwin setup >=20 >> UfW will be completely independent of Cygwin. >> More=E2=80=99s the pity, because it means you=E2=80=99ll be incentivized= to choose one or >> the other, likely to Cygwin=E2=80=99s net detriment. >=20 > Since it will be independent of Windows as well as Cygwin, the choice is a > nobrainer. If that is your decision for yourself, that=E2=80=99s perfectly fine. Howe= ver, I predict that a whole lot of people will find uses for this technolog= y, thereby making it =E2=80=9Cuseful,=E2=80=9D by definition. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple