Is Windows being ported to a linux kernel?

Is Windows being ported to a linux kernel?

Attached: microsoft-hearts-linux.png (454x276, 51K)

Other urls found in this thread:

gnu.org/software/hurd/
en.wikibooks.org/wiki/A_Quick_Introduction_to_Unix/Directory_Structure
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact Windows/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, Windows plus Linux.

I don't know. I'll have to wait for Linus next video to be sure

Embrace. Extend. Extinguish.

>Is Windows being ported to a linux kernel?
would be pretty cool desu. Thinking about developers and how much easier it would be to port something to GNU/Linux.

>Linux Kernel
Yes... Linux is a kernel...

Yes, its a little project called WINE. You may have heard of it.

>le epic 90s micorosft maymay xDddDdDd

Fucking unfunny cunt

>a linux kernel
is there more than one?

On the one side I think that this would be really nice for the future of Linux but on the other hand my brain does not stop thinking about what Microsoft could possibly fuck up about it. They would probably deform the "image" of how a Linux distro looks like so hard that it wouldn't be any different from Windows on NT

What's the difference between Linux and MacOS?
I mean i know linux is a kernel and MacOS has XNU kernel, but is MacOS to XNU what Ubuntu is to Linux, that is, the GUI? If so why the terminal commands is almost the same on macos and ubuntu and are both these
examples under the UNIX tree like where is everything falling at?

Attached: indexw.jpg (254x198, 6K)

Yeah ofc.
>gnu.org/software/hurd/

Yes and no. The base of Mac OS X is the FreeBSD base, and GNU/Linux has the GNU coreutils etc. Gnome 3 to Linux is Aqua (Mac OS X GUI) to XNU/FreeBSD.

But that's not the Linux kernel

Mac has a decent and consistent user interface, Linux has not.

Not even that far fetched. I doubt many MS techs even know how the shit works anymore as they keep phasing in and out new teams for all sorts of useless shit.

fpbp

So both linux and xnu kernels are in the UNIX family right?

I also noticed the macos has more of a limited command line by default. things i could do in ubuntu terminal without installing any package doesnt exist or are not supported by maos i guess?

is that a kernel specific thing? i mean the MacOS and Ubuntu are just gui interfaces to interact with the
kernel, so im guessing the terminal is interacting with the kernels so xnu is more limited than linux?

XNU isn't a kernel:

GNU=XNU
Linux=Darwin
GTK=Cocoa
Gnome=Aqua

Unless they buy the kernel, it wouldn't be shit. Actually, it would be the best move Microsoft will do as probably it will make the developers go and support tons of Windows only applications for Linux, and hence you would have native stuff ported and actual graphics card drivers. But of course they wouldn't do it, Microsoft would lose everything if they did that, since other distros would be free and less heavy on specs. It would have to revolutionize Linux to ever consider such change, but again, I highly doubt it.

We have WSL just flip it around.

>So both linux and xnu kernels are in the UNIX family right?
Correct.
>I also noticed the macos has more of a limited command line by default. things i could do in ubuntu terminal without installing any package doesnt exist or are not supported by maos i guess?
That's due to Apple not taking care to make sure all the necessary tools are there, they aren't prioritizing command line usage
>is that a kernel specific thing? i mean the MacOS and Ubuntu are just gui interfaces to interact with the
>kernel, so im guessing the terminal is interacting with the kernels so xnu is more limited than linux?
It's not really about XNU but about Apple not adding the required packages and maintaining them (for ex python sometimes ends up outdated because Apple)
Wrong.

GNU=FreeBSD userland in Mac OS X
Linux = XNU (It's a kernel made of code in parts from CMU Mach, some freebsd networking code and IOKit)
GTK=Cocoa
Gnome=Aqua

>XNU is the computer operating system kernel developed at Apple Inc. since December 1996 for use in the macOS operating system and released as free and open-source software as part of the Darwin operating system.

This is from wikipedia. Im trying to understand unix-linux systems and i cant find a valid source anywhere where i can learn about them except wikipedia that is confusing as fuck.

so the kernels are linux and xnu. xnu is only for macos while linux is kernel for all the distributions such as ubuntu/mint/debian etc.

the interfaces for linux distributions are GNU/GTK/GNOME depending which distribution youre using i suppose? if so whats in the macos side for interfaces or whatever, the cocoa aqua and freebsd?

It's definitely very convoluted, keep in mind that Apple smashed 3 kernels together and built Mac OS X interface on top of a very old graphic system + PDF (funny fact: PDF rendering on mac os x is much faster than other OS because of this).

GNU is the amalgam of UNIX commands (ls,cd, cat etc) and so is the FreeBSD userland inside Mac OS X.

I'm into UNIX and programming since 12 (got my Ubuntu 8.04 CD from cannonical when they were distributing it for free) and this shit is confusing even to me so don't blame yourself.

No but GNU and almost all linux-compatible apps have been ported via the WSL

i been teaching myself python programming for the past few months and i use a mac and havent really took time to learn anything about unix systems which i think is mandatory if you want to do anything. i had ubuntu for the past 5 years and still dont know what is what and also cant find any good source to study about the unix systems except
fucking wikipedia nonsense.

i found this book "how linux works" and im thinking of studying it but will the things it say apply to xnu and macos?

Attached: indexe.jpg (195x259, 11K)

It'll have parallels. But the best thing is to read the POSIX standards (which teaches you things that applies to all UNIX OSes)

Download "The Linux Programming Interface" and only read the abstract parts (parts that teach what POSIX threads are, what processes are) and stay away from the programming details parts cuz they differ from OS to OS.

Also look into the python os and sys modules, they have plenty of relevant information for your needs

nice im downloading the book right now. does it teach you about the unix file systems and where the files of an installed program go to witch directories as well as its quite confusing compare to windows where a program gets installed in one folder opposed to like several in linux. any recommendation books?

I know people that are working on this. It is true

>Linux kernel
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

No.
But it is being turned into a SystemD module, as everything else.

For the 98 trillionth time, no you stupid fucking brain-dead retards.

The tree structure is simple

en.wikibooks.org/wiki/A_Quick_Introduction_to_Unix/Directory_Structure

In Mac OS X is kinda fucky though. there's an /usr folder for normal UNIX apps (presumably for compatibility with unix commands that need an /usr) and an/ Applications folder for Mac OS X apps.

The most interesting parts of the operating system are the commands and OS interfaces like pipes, processes, threads, memory maps etc. You can do those easily with the os and sys libraries in python to build some system apps.

Well from what I understand about the Linux licenses. And that isn't anything really. If they did it they would have to offer the OS for free and to make money off of it offer something additional.

Though I would fully accept that I am 100% wrong about that.

Attached: okay.png (948x205, 82K)

Are you ok user? Have a snickers

i see. well thanks these are some shit i had to ask someone to provide info for as i couldnt find shit anywhere else

Imagine that MacOS is a guy from a old family that has his liver and lungs replaced with those of some relatives. He has a marvelous surgeon that not only makes him live more than an average transplantes, but also makes him look attractive to normies.
Linux, in other hand, is a guy that tried to be like that old family. It trkes so hard that actually does make shit better than that ancient lineage, but he's still a clone. However, the guys in the cith know that guy can be useful, even more than his good looking counterpart. However they always avoid him to make shit that requires social skills

No, I'm not OK. I've been watching this curious form of brain-damage roll across the floor for 20 years - always the same outcome:
>retards who say "yes", and are too stupid to know how wrong they are - , , etc.
>retards who spew forth memes that resembles freetards far more than MS - , , etc.
>retards who list antireasons to do it like they're pros - , , etc.
It's really my own fault: I've spent the past few days on /tv/, and I forgot how full of assisted living ABI retards Jow Forums is.

The Internet used to be much better for finding information and learning this. Nowadays it's desperate indians shitting out non-informative articles for some click bucks and a whole bunch of retardation. Have fun!

>Is Windows being ported to a linux kernel?
No. That's not really possible unless they rewrite the entire userland and throw away decades of drivers.

>What's the difference between Linux and MacOS?
Everything, really. It's not just that the kernels are different. The drivers and interfaces for low level system stuff is all different. The userland tools are different. The user interface is different. The file systems are different.

>If so why the terminal commands is almost the same on macos and ubuntu
POSIX compliance. The outward user interface and a lot of the functionality for specific command line tools detailed in the POSIX specification may be the same, but underneath they're very different programs. MacOS uses a few BSD and GNU tools but that's it. And on the flip side, Linux and BSD use fuckall from MacOS.

>are both these examples under the UNIX tree
Sort of. MacOS, Linux, and BSD are all Unix-like and POSIX compliant but they aren't Unix. Unix is an operating system developed at Bell Labs, which evolved over the years into proprietary systems like IRIX, Solaris, HP-UX, Unixware, etc. Apple even had a Unix distro at one point called A/UX.

Attached: 1545841588340.png (500x428, 50K)

Why would it though? Windows NT kernel is technically superior to the Linux kernel. It would be cool if Microsoft open sourced the kernel though.

>Is Windows being ported to a linux kernel?

It's not even theoretically possible. The NT kernel is a spiritual successor to VMS, with an asynchronous systems API built in from the beginning, whereas Linux still has an absolute garbage AIO design and implementation to this day.

This is not to say that Linux has not innovated or refined a lot of things in substantial ways, but people need to realize that it has still always been hamstrung in a lot of ways by using '70s UNIX design as a starting point.

But VMS is dogshit.

Attached: 1545072186258.gif (1023x906, 3.07M)

Considering Microsoft is transitioning into a services companty, it wouldn’t surprise me if they were trying to rid themselves of Windows and it’s userbase by slowly getting them accustomed to Linux and then ending support.

>But VMS is dogshit.
arguably, but UNIX is even worse than that.

>Linux still has an absolute garbage AIO design and implementation to this day.
Nobody uses that

Yeah, it's well known to be completely awful.
The problem is that scheduler-assisted async dispatch (e.g., IOCP) are fundamentally more efficient than userspace-handled muxing on multiple descriptors (e.g., select, epoll, etc.).

IO juggling in many-connection/-FD software designs is just needlessly shitty in Linux.

t. professional Linux systems programmer

Could you expand? I always see people loving completion ports but I don't know much else

Daily reminder that most Windows limitations are caused by the Windows API and not NT.

>vms
>dogshit
T. Zoomer

The essence of tradition muxing is the creation of a pseudo-file that becomes readable whenever any one of a registered set of other files/channels is readable. So, a process wakes up, gets a list of files that can be read/written without blocking, then chooses by itself which operations to perform if there are multiple available. The following read/write calls themselves are synchronous, meaning the process is still busy until the actual data is copied where it needs to go.

Async operation means describing an operation, setting aside the source/destination memory buffer, then asking the system to resume userspace code whenever the operation has already been completed. (I.e., no 2nd syscall to do the actual work) Some natively async systems, including Windows, allow the registration of execution contexts to be re-entered upon the completion, with even the option for parallel execution in separate pooled threads for different FDs/sockets. What you pay is usually higher memory use from reserving separate userspace read/receive buffers for each FD, but in return you get a substantially cleaner way of writing a lot of types of common IO patterns.

Consider how much of a headache it is to write a network server in Linux with multiple client-facing threads servicing the same socket set: You either do just the network IO in a single thread and delegate further processing to a manually managed worker thread pool, or you partition sockets between some number of separate epoll-waiting threads and get crappy balancing/ordering issues, or you attempt some insanely hacky shit with multiple threads all trying to use the same epoll set.

IOCP plus thread pools allows this and similar patterns to be pounded out correctly with almost zero effort or thought.

That's basically like saying "Maybach cars have nice interiors, a V8 engine does not". Total bullshit, computer-illiterate claim.

Attached: Capturesmall.jpg (674x599, 60K)