Where were you when Microsoft became based
Where were you when Microsoft became based
Carson Gray
Other urls found in this thread:
channel9.msdn.com
dl.dropboxusercontent.com
msdn.microsoft.com
phoronix.com
twitter.com
Caleb Adams
I cant see the future, user.
Nathaniel Ward
what am i supposed to be seeing here?
Connor Brooks
windows got bash so basically op wanted to use bash on windows to feel 1337
Adam Diaz
Does windows bash do anything that cygwin doesn't?
Gavin King
it does. WSL have full distro where you can deploy dev environment using package manager. You can deploy web server and it's available from localhost without changing anything and available from outside with one firewall rule.
Also, they have some magic for MSVS. They can now compile linux binaries and use gdb for debbagging using some sort of ssh-channel.
Luis Hill
I think you've confused the "based" meme with the "just" meme
Xavier Hernandez
Thats fuckin sweet. I always wanted windows to have bash. I maybe i could actually do some programming on wangblows now
Mason Miller
As a Ruby on Rails dev I say that Win10 bash is pretty fucking based.
It still has some issues, but these are being worked on.
Justin Parker
It's the Frankenstein's monster they have created. Might be useful though.
Alexander Hall
Embrace, extend and extinguish.
Chase King
I'm still going to use msys2.
Connor Kelly
Does it have all the shit the usually comes with Linux, like gnuplot?
Chase Thomas
nice
Jaxson Ramirez
How does it interface with windows programs?
For example, can I include the programs directory in my path and call my programs from the bash shell?
Parker Martinez
It's literally an unmodified amd64 Ubuntu userland running on NT. There's no need to recompile anything. You can just install and use any Ubuntu package as-is. I'm not sure what the limits are, but this thing can apparently run everything up to and including Firefox just fine.
bash: /mnt/c/Windows/notepad.exe: cannot execute binary file: Exec format error
Anthony Hughes
Your windows file system is automatically mounted in /mnt.
Just cd there and you can access everything you have. However, I wonder which windows programs are you intending to launch from bash.
Joseph Wood
Logan Hughes
>doing unpaid QA for Microsoft
I'll stick to my stable builds, thanks.
Justin Cooper
Can it run Wine?
Isaac Kelly
Apparently yes, but it doesn't just werk. There's some sort of architecture fuckery going on and you're probably going to have to compile it yourself.
David Moore
Nevermind, it doesn't seem to work even if you do manage to install it. 32-bit executables don't work at all, and Wine64 bitches about not being able to allocate memory.
Oliver Garcia
How does this differ from "Ubuntu on Windows" bash?
Bentley Walker
That's what it is. There was just some announcement of a new release that (finally) supports calling Windows binaries directly, and I think some improvements to the command shell window.
Ethan Carter
>NTFS filesystem
yep still shit
Does it at least run GCC native?
Jason Fisher
How's it interface with hardware? Does it interface with NT flush?
Jason Robinson
Well, considering it has real, NATIVE fork/exec which doesn't go through CreateProcess, it's just straight up faster in almost every case.
Leo Lewis
idk, i'll let you know if it ever happens
Jose Parker
>unironically thinking NTFS is bad
Explain yourself.
I'll be waiting.
Charles Sanchez
He heard other people say it so it must be right :^)
Christian Gomez
>It's literally an unmodified amd64 Ubuntu userland
Ehhhh it actually isn't unmodified.... you should try and do some research before you say shit like this. It's missing a lot of packages, and a lot of (userland) tools are straight up broken.
Lincoln Bell
>No GPU passthrough
Pointless
Caleb Ramirez
Worse performance than ext4/btfs/zfs/etc, no journaling, worse handling of file names, worse handling of large file blocks compared to ext4 (less fragmentation), absolute joke of garbage collection...
Luckily you didn't have to wait for too long for an explanation.
ntfs is shit, why do you retards try and defend what you know to be bad? How much is Microsoft paying you?
Noah Reyes
Other than performing ~5-10% slower overall, being structurally inferior (block handling in searches, not supporting symbolic links, having a suboptimal permissions system), being proprietary, being over 15 years old, being faster to fragment than all modern alternatives?
Blake Reed
>Worse performance than ext4/btfs/zfs/etc,
[citation needed]
>no journaling,
Flat out false
> worse handling of file names, worse handling of large file blocks compared to ext4 (less fragmentation), absolute joke of garbage collection...
[citation needed]
Tyler Stewart
they know its bad, it cant keep track of large numbers of files well so they made GitVFS
Sebastian Wright
It already had whatever was packaged with git, MSYS I think. (fuck cygwin)
John Howard
there are difference between file system and virtual file system. not the same thing
Matthew Allen
better terminal color support I assume
Brandon Butler
phoronix.com
>inb4 loonix with ntfs
It's fully supported in the kernel. Ntfs is a miserable shit and only the desktop friendly NT kernel scheduler can help on it a little bit.
Justin Gonzalez
Studio B or maybe at lunch in the commons.
But they're really not all that based...
Ethan Nguyen
Isn't it? I get that WSL itself is incomplete and you can't install a lot of packages because it's amd64-only, but it seems to use a vanilla Ubuntu image and the default repositories.