anyone is using ColiNux ? (cooperative linux on Windows)

[legacy]

CoLinux, it works great on XP/32bit, but …
anyone is using it? if so, which is your feedback?

[amspire]

I was thinking of using it, but it a very old distro (last stable 2011) and to use it, you would have to recompile things like OpenSSH because any version from 2011 will probably be insecure. The 2.6 kernel is incredibly stable, but you loose out on many of the enhancements since like btrfs filesystem support. Support for containers is becoming huge, and for that, you really need kernel 3.10 or later.

It would be OK if you just need to do fairly straight forward stuff, but you can probably do the same with Cygwin running within the Windows OS.

Cygwin is great because you can take something like rsync from it, just find its dependant libraries and copy them out to the same folder and you now have a portable full linux compatible version of rsync that runs  solidly on Windows. There is a way to quickly find the dependencies - forgot how for now.

There is also MSYS which is a fork of Cygwin that is compiled with Microsoft compilers and libraries, and Gow is an interesting very lightweight alternative.

Otherwise, I just go straight for a Virtual Machine and install any Linux I want.

Richard

[legacy]

and to use it, you would have to recompile things like OpenSSH because any version from 2011 will probably be insecure.

that is pointless, especially if the machine needs to be used locally

The 2.6 kernel is incredibly stable, but you loose out on many of the enhancements since like btrfs filesystem support

that is pointless, since you you only need to access the NTFS or FAT volume for shared project and documents, and keeps linux-specific things under EXT3

It would be OK if you just need to do fairly straight forward stuff, but you can probably do the same with Cygwin running within the Windows OS.

Cygwin is slower by 10 orders of magnitude

[tggzzz]

CoLinux, it works great on XP/32bit, but …
anyone is using it? if so, which is your feedback?

Doesn't that just mean you get all the disadvantages of the Windows "kernel"?

What is the key benefit you expect to get from running this, and isn't there a better or more conventional way of getting that benefit?

[3db]

CoLinux, it works great on XP/32bit, but …
anyone is using it? if so, which is your feedback?

Changing from Win7/64 bit to Win XP in order to run this, Pointless !!

[amspire]

Bit of a pointless response. Are you actually going to say what isn't pointless, or are we meant to guess?

[tszaboo]

Nope. I have a fast enought computer at work, and a bunch of servers at my disposal, and I would not run linux at home. I also dont stick nails into my hand or other self harming btw.

[legacy]

Changing from Win7/64 bit to Win XP in order to run this, Pointless !!

here I am non Windows/XP/32bit
since I have to support software designed for XP

[legacy]

What is the key benefit you expect to get from running this, and isn't there a better or more conventional way of getting that benefit?

it can help, a lot, when you need to integrate applications that are designed for Windows
in my case I do not like the "ghdl" port, instead I prefer to use the linux native software
but I need to integrate ISE v10.1 with ghdl, thus …

ISE v10.1 is installed on Windows XP, while ghdl is installed inside Colinux
and they share the whole partition D: over a special module called "cofs"
and I can also share the COM1 port

I am designing a debug-processor, which needs to talk with a linux machine over the serial line
while on Windows I need to run a special software that collects informations and shows me reports

I opened this topic with the Hope that people talks about defects/solutions
e.g. the TAP has defects
e.g. sharing the COM is not documented


talking about BTRF, or OpenSSH is like talking about bullshit, since in this case you'd better use VirtualBox, or a real machine

[legacy]

applications that are designed for Windows

I had forgotten to say: I use MobaXterm as Windows X11 terminal, it's a good match

ISE v10.1 comes with a linux port, which works great, thus it's not the best example
but I have a lot to HDL tools that I use on Windows, and they do not have a linux port

CoLinux is not a virtual machine, that is the point, it's good if you need to integrate
since Virtual Box is … not comfortable for these kind of things

[amspire]

talking about BTRF, or OpenSSH is like talking about bullshit, since in this case you'd better use VirtualBox, or a real machine

Legacy, here is your original post that I replied to:

CoLinux, it works great on XP/32bit, but …
anyone is using it? if so, which is your feedback?

You are furious with me because I didn't guess from these two lines that you are using ghdl on Linux, ISE on Windows XP, that you are sharing the D partition, and that you are sharing COM1. I am sorry if that makes me stupid. You were mad at me for mentioning SSH, but you admit to using a terminal. SSH just means you can get the same terminal windows on your XP machine, or from your mobile phone while you are on a bus. If you are doing slow simulations, it may be handy to be able to check in from anywhere. There is a lot of hidden power built into SSH that basic terminals do not have.

I know - you will get mad again because you don't use buses. 

If you are into VHDL development, then you are an interesting and worthwhile person to talk to, and if you be a bit more helpful, you probably could help others trying to go down the same track.

I would guess that you would prefer not to have to use Windows XP and a 32 bit 4G RAM environment. It could be that some of your old software only runs on Windows XP, but it is a pity if that forces you to use XP all the time.

Probably the big sticking point is the use of a shared COM1. That is just not a portable way to communicate between applications. Once you get the hang of it, rewriting your code to use the TCP stack is better, faster and totally portable. I really do understand that there may be some whacky issue that has forced you to use COM1 as the only solution.

If there is a way around the COM1 port issue, your options open right up. Virtualbox VM's can share folders on the Windows system. Docker containers can share folders too. Someone actually made a ghdl Docker container, and if you install docker for windows, you can get it from Dockerhub with a single simple command line in a few minutes. This ghdl container has little documentation and the readme is in a  foreign language. Maybe useable, but if it turns out that docker is a good solution for you, you can always set up your own ghdl container, save it to dockerhub, and then anyone else here can get the benefit of your setup of ghdl on almost any platform with a single command line. Don't want to learn Docker - fine.

I have some legacy apps that need XP, so I have XP as virtual machines on Virtualbox and KXM. Virtualbox can run headless, so you can just have a desktop icon that can immediately launch an XP window. It is pretty good. If you really strip XP down, you can get XP by itself using about 250Meg RAM and the VM can boot very fast on a modern fast 64bit PC.

Just suggestions.

[Macbeth]

Out of all the Windows X-Server clients, I've found Cygwin/X by far the best. Of course this means you also get the advantage of running linux on Windows too, and can compile stuff with gcc, etc. I also add the path to C:\cygwin64\bin to my Windows command shell path, so I don't have to keep changing ls to dir all the time! Being able to use stuff like grep is great as well.

There is always Windows PowerShell I guess, but why bother learning something so obscure as that?

(and I am a Microsoft Certified Solution Developer )

[Bruce Abbott]

I would not run linux at home. I also dont stick nails into my hand or other self harming btw.

I installed Linux on a spare PC, for running all those wonderful programs you can't get on Windows.  It hasn't been turned on in over year. Running Linux at all - pointless!!

[Monkeh]

I would not run linux at home. I also dont stick nails into my hand or other self harming btw.

 

I installed Linux on a spare PC, for running all those wonderful programs you can't get on Windows.  It hasn't been turned on in over year. Running Linux at all - pointless!!

 

Crazy concept: Not everyone uses a computer the same way you do.

[tggzzz]

I would not run linux at home. I also dont stick nails into my hand or other self harming btw.

I installed Linux on a spare PC, for running all those wonderful programs you can't get on Windows.  It hasn't been turned on in over year. Running Linux at all - pointless!!

Quite right.

Who in their right mind would forego the pleasure of finding out which antivirus package is good this year, and of having to rebuild your machine because the manufacturer's update borked it.

[Armxnian]

I would not run linux at home. I also dont stick nails into my hand or other self harming btw.

I installed Linux on a spare PC, for running all those wonderful programs you can't get on Windows.  It hasn't been turned on in over year. Running Linux at all - pointless!!

Quite right.

Who in their right mind would forego the pleasure of finding out which antivirus package is good this year, and of having to rebuild your machine because the manufacturer's update borked it.

Another advantage of using Windows is that you don't have to backup your data, because it's saved daily on NSA servers.

[SeanB]

Another advantage of using Windows is that you don't have to backup your data, because it's saved daily on NSA servers.

Getting it might require a trip not to UTAH, but to a small undisclosed island, where you have to provide the entertainment to the guards, which mostly consists of them doing "enhanced enquiry" on you.

[Flenser]

I used colinux a few years ago when it was still actively being updated.
- installed the current version of centos at that time. A server install with no GUI.
- installed Oracle
- did some development work on the support/management scripts we use in our Oracle environment
- all at the command line
- all on a (relatively) slow laptop

I struck no issues while I used it, but then I was doing a simple ssh login using putty and just running Oracle and my scripts using the command line. Not using networking, USB or serial so no comments on how robust these were.

I really liked the elegance of colinux. The Linux kernel is a windows exe that runs as a windows process and there is little, or no, overhead as the linux binaries are x86 and are run with no change. I can't comment on what the overhead might be to trap any privileged x86 commands that the Linux binaries are not permitted to run.

I stopped using it with my move to 64 bit Win7 on my laptop(s). There was a move to do an 64 bit port of colinux but it never happened.

If you are after a low overhead way to run linux on a laptop, you have the right 32-bit Win OS installed and you can live with the older version colinux linux kernel then give it a try. You are stuck with the limitations.
- Colinux has no multiprocessor support but this wasn't as issue for me. My laptops only have 2 cores and I'm happy having colinux resticted to just one core because this means that the win host OS can always get at least 50% of the CPU.
- On a 32 bit OS your host windows OS and the colinux OS have to share the max ~= 3.75 GB that is available under 32 bit windows

With more powerful laptops now I use virtualbox to run linux+oracle, when I need to.
- My understanding is that the QEMU emulator originally interpreted the client instructions, even when running an x86 client on an x86 host, but that they have changed this to now run x86 clients natively where that is possible.
- Runs on 64 bit Win7, which is a bit plus. You can use more than 4GB of memory, if you have it installed.
- Multicore support
- and I think that there are more options in the networking support, which is useful if you want to run mutiple linux instances and need to virtualize a physical network setup

[nctnico]

I don't really see the advantage over having a virtual machine (Virtualbox is free). It is easy to share files by mapping a network drive.

[legacy]

I don't really see the advantage over having a virtual machine (Virtualbox is free).
It is easy to share files by mapping a network drive.

that is the problem I had here, sharing file by mapping a network drive, in short SAMBA
there are a few software on Windows which do not like to have to deal with a network drive
they want a physical device (NTFS, or FAT32)

VirtualBox is better than ColiNux in a few things: e.g. ColiNux uses a UserModeLinux approach
which is cooperative, which introduces a lot of delays in threads, especially if used for networking
while VirtualBox gets scheduled by the Windows-kernel as virtual machine, so the linux kernel runs with its native deadline
which makes it more reactive on socket events

unfortunately VirtualBox has a lot of troubles in mapping USB-Uart and native-Uart
here it makes me to struggle a lot, while ColiNux has no problem with that

in short, I am going to install both of them

[legacy]

ColiNux box:

• kernel 2.6.26, with its original support for cofs, and tap
• rootfs, gentoo-x86/i586, recompiled and optimized from stage1 (by catalyst)

Windows support:

• mobaXterm, x11 support
• Geany/WinPort, projects IDE
• GTKwave/WinPort, GHDL visualizer

I am using the above WinPorts, because running the same native applications inside ColiNux
(ofcourse, exporting the DISPLAY over mabaXterm X11) comes with too  annoying delay

everything else (compilers, gcc, gnat, gdhl, etc, including text based application) is working fine.

[nctnico]

I don't really see the advantage over having a virtual machine (Virtualbox is free).
It is easy to share files by mapping a network drive.

that is the problem I had here, sharing file by mapping a network drive, in short SAMBA
there are a few software on Windows which do not like to have to deal with a network drive
they want a physical device (NTFS, or FAT32)

If you map a drive letter those problems are gone.

[legacy]

If you map a drive letter those problems are gone.

already tried, it didn't help

[suicidaleggroll]

If you map a drive letter those problems are gone.

already tried, it didn't help

You can also go the other direction and share one of the host directories with the guest using the virtualization tools.  No network overhead involved and it's just a regular path on the local drive on the Windows side.

[suicidaleggroll]

I would not run linux at home. I also dont stick nails into my hand or other self harming btw.

I installed Linux on a spare PC, for running all those wonderful programs you can't get on Windows.  It hasn't been turned on in over year. Running Linux at all - pointless!!

Funny, I have a Windows system I could say the exact same thing about.