General > General Technical Chat
When will MS replace the NT-kernel in windows?
Nominal Animal:
--- Quote from: CatalinaWOW on February 04, 2024, 12:30:46 am ---Some day a genius is going to formalize a theory of complexity which says that complexity is conserved. Eliminating it in one place adds it somewhere else.
--- End quote ---
It is not the complexity of systems, it is the complexity of interactions. Humans do not do "simple".
--- Quote from: PlainName on February 03, 2024, 11:26:52 pm ---our tools which we knew like the back of our hands were Windows and many things we used didn't exist on Linux.
--- End quote ---
That's the difference between us: for me, it is exactly the reverse.
(And do note that I was a very heavy Windows user in the '95-NT era, with commercial licenses to several software packages like Photoshop and Macromedia Director. So I'm not saying this as someone looking at Windows from the outside; this is just because of my own experience and having shifted from Windows to Linux in the early noughties.)
--- Quote from: PlainName on February 03, 2024, 11:26:52 pm ---So anything we used - from uboot through the rootfs, apps, kernel drivers and all the tools necessary to create those - was built entirely from source with zero outside dependencies. But we were embedded system developers and the norm was that the target was not the development host.
--- End quote ---
Yup. When I did that myself around the turn of the century (for servers I maintained myself, on the same architecture/not cross-compiling), I participated in Linux From Scratch to understand all those dependencies and how to avoid say gcc and glibc "leaking" from the host to the target. Cross-compiling solves that, but for more complex software packages (especially with autotools trying to detect what is available on the target by scanning the host) it is somewhat more work to get right.
Today, it is extremely useful when you target ARM-based appliances (routers etc; OpenWRT cross-compiles everything) and SBCs, using much more powerful many-core x86-64 as a build host, so the skills and understanding are still very applicable. Not many who do such integration commercially understand the issues, though – looking at their SDKs and GPL'd parts of their tree, Asus routers being a particularly painful example – so I do often recommend reading LFS to understand the core basis of Linux integration, and associated issues.
--- Quote from: CatalinaWOW on February 04, 2024, 12:30:46 am ---[Speaking of which, IMO if web developers want to try their stuff out on their development PC they should be forced to use a Pentium.]
--- End quote ---
Agreed!
Single- and dual-core SBCs are a good alternative for today; as are Chromebooks and similar. If you look at some of the self-contained examples I've discussed here, like my Finite Impulse Response Analysis page, you'll notice that the calculation work is not done in the event handler, because that would freeze the UI, but in a "background" JS triggered by a timeout. Current JS engines are very efficient and fast, and they prioritize the event handlers over background/timeout events, so it works fine, just slower, even on slow machines. (This was in the context of using browsers for such tool pages, requiring no internet connection, everything contained in a single file that works fine even locally.)
Karel:
- MS has implemented SSH client in windows powershell.
- MS will implement the "sudo" command in windows powershell.
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Microsoft-Windows-sudo
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Windows-SSH-Official
I have no doubts about what MS is planning to do...
:popcorn:
nctnico:
--- Quote from: PlainName on February 04, 2024, 02:05:04 am ---
--- Quote ---But ah that downside. All those config files, that require a system expert to understand and manage.
--- End quote ---
Why? You could have an app that deals with all that stuff - major Linux apps tend to basically be front ends to many sub-apps, after all. The normal user wouldn't need to dick with the config files but just use the config app to manage the config. Hell, it could even be (gasp) a GUI! But those files still exist if a guru wants to roll their sleeves up and surgically excise something.
--- End quote ---
Such a GUI tool will work much better when the config files are stored in a singular entity compared to a whole bunch of seperate files spread across the system which may even change format for no good reason. Gnome already has a configuration file like that.
tooki:
I dunno. That’s basically what the Windows Registry is, and I think that’s proven to be a mistake in the long run. Individual config files, located correctly for the scope they should apply to, seems like the better approach IMHO.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version