Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by M Sweg » Wed, 03 Feb 1999 04:00:00



Hi all,

Just saw on the biz wire that a company http://www.interix.com has
developed a 64 bit application that runs a a unix/linux emulator within
the MSoft Win2000 (NT5.0) platform environment. They want alot of
Linux apps ported to their API interface so that Unix runs within Windows.
Seems kind of ironic since Linux is trying to run Windows apps in Unix;
but we don't have the source code to their stuff, but they have ours.
Hmmm! seems like there isn't any competition again. Msoft is supporting them
though.

They have a limited list of things they want ported such as gcc (all compilers and assemblers) and emacs and Tex to name a few. You have 2.5 months to do it
by -- they end of January 1999. Anything else is nice but they won't pay for.
Those they'd like you to port will only pay a maximum of $1000 to a cheap
payment of $500. They didn't mention [conveniently] that they would like the
linux kernel or Sunos x86 kernel etc to run within the interix Win2000.
The reason it was supposed to be done by the end of January 1999 (now past)
is due to todays press release about this product.

Hmmm! if you can't get the Unix software vendors to port their stuf from Unix
to Window Nt, then make the Unix apps run within NT! In this way you can
say that your OS is a engineering workstation.

--
        Mike,

 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by H. Reinec » Wed, 03 Feb 1999 04:00:00



> Hi all,

> Just saw on the biz wire that a company http://www.interix.com has
> developed a 64 bit application that runs a a unix/linux emulator within
> the MSoft Win2000 (NT5.0) platform environment. They want alot of
> Linux apps ported to their API interface so that Unix runs within Windows.
> Seems kind of ironic since Linux is trying to run Windows apps in Unix;
> but we don't have the source code to their stuff, but they have ours.
> Hmmm! seems like there isn't any competition again. Msoft is supporting them
> though.

Ah, reinventing the wheel again. Brilliant !

Quote:> They have a limited list of things they want ported such as gcc (all
> compilers and assemblers) and emacs and Tex to name a few. You have
> 2.5 months to do it by -- they end of January 1999. Anything else is
> nice but they won't pay for. Those they'd like you to port will only
> pay a maximum of $1000 to a cheap payment of $500. They didn't
> mention [conveniently] that they would like the linux kernel or
> Sunos x86 kernel etc to run within the interix Win2000. The reason
> it was supposed to be done by the end of January 1999 (now past) is
> due to todays press release about this product.

Uh-oh. Stay away from such companies. Almost _any_ market research
would have told them that those products are already ported to MS-Win,
those you mentioned since several years.
Don't see the point to get their expensive stuff if I can get my hands
on a native version ...

But hey, you'll be ever surprised with the stuff PR people come up.

Cheers,

Hannes
--

Fluid Loading and Instrumentation Center        Tel: (+44) 131 452 3149
Dept. of Civil & Offshore Engineering               Fax: (+44) 131 451 3154
Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh EH14 4AS

 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by Colin Smit » Wed, 03 Feb 1999 04:00:00



> Hi all,

> Just saw on the biz wire that a company http://www.interix.com has
> developed a 64 bit application that runs a a unix/linux emulator within
> the MSoft Win2000 (NT5.0) platform environment. They want alot of
> Linux apps ported to their API interface so that Unix runs within Windows.
> Seems kind of ironic since Linux is trying to run Windows apps in Unix;
> but we don't have the source code to their stuff, but they have ours.
> Hmmm! seems like there isn't any competition again. Msoft is supporting them
> though.

Hmmm....... Yes lets spend lots of money to run our Linux applications inside an emulator on Windows NT rather than on Linux...........

Doh.....

Why bother?

> They have a limited list of things they want ported such as gcc (all compilers and assemblers) and emacs and Tex to name a few. You have 2.5 months to do it
> by -- they end of January 1999. Anything else is nice but they won't pay for.
> Those they'd like you to port will only pay a maximum of $1000 to a cheap
> payment of $500. They didn't mention [conveniently] that they would like the
> linux kernel or Sunos x86 kernel etc to run within the interix Win2000.
> The reason it was supposed to be done by the end of January 1999 (now past)
> is due to todays press release about this product.

> Hmmm! if you can't get the Unix software vendors to port their stuf from Unix
> to Window Nt, then make the Unix apps run within NT! In this way you can
> say that your OS is a engineering workstation.

> --
>         Mike,


--

|Linux: Delivers on the promises Microsoft make. | The Zeppelin of   |
|             http://www.linux.org/              | operating systems.|
 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by Bill Crosb » Wed, 03 Feb 1999 04:00:00


Ya, Hummingbird Communications has been doing this for awhile. Its fair, but no where compares to the Linux OS. Linux X11 emulating a MS environment is more
stable than MS Windows emulating a X11 Linux environment. NT crashes (BSOD) too much when pushed by heavy apps.
 http://www.hummingbird.com/products/nc/exceed/index.html

> Hi all,

> Just saw on the biz wire that a company http://www.interix.com has
> developed a 64 bit application that runs a a unix/linux emulator within
> the MSoft Win2000 (NT5.0) platform environment. They want alot of
> Linux apps ported to their API interface so that Unix runs within Windows.
> Seems kind of ironic since Linux is trying to run Windows apps in Unix;
> but we don't have the source code to their stuff, but they have ours.
> Hmmm! seems like there isn't any competition again. Msoft is supporting them
> though.

> They have a limited list of things they want ported such as gcc (all compilers and assemblers) and emacs and Tex to name a few. You have 2.5 months to do it
> by -- they end of January 1999. Anything else is nice but they won't pay for.
> Those they'd like you to port will only pay a maximum of $1000 to a cheap
> payment of $500. They didn't mention [conveniently] that they would like the
> linux kernel or Sunos x86 kernel etc to run within the interix Win2000.
> The reason it was supposed to be done by the end of January 1999 (now past)
> is due to todays press release about this product.

> Hmmm! if you can't get the Unix software vendors to port their stuf from Unix
> to Window Nt, then make the Unix apps run within NT! In this way you can
> say that your OS is a engineering workstation.

> --
>         Mike,


 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by Iain Bennet » Wed, 03 Feb 1999 04:00:00



Quote:>Ya, Hummingbird Communications has been doing this for awhile. Its fair,

but no where compares to the Linux OS. Linux X11 emulating a MS environment
is more
Quote:>stable than MS Windows emulating a X11 Linux environment. NT crashes (BSOD)

too much when pushed by heavy apps.

Quote:> http://www.hummingbird.com/products/nc/exceed/index.html

Exceed is simply an X windowing evironment for Windows, it is hardly an
emulator for UNIX.
 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by Bill Crosb » Wed, 03 Feb 1999 04:00:00


What is the difference between the two? We run the FEA app EMRC/NISA Display 3
v8.0 with Exceed 6.01 which is a Unix app. Just curious about the differences
between the term "environment" and "emulator". We also have programmers doing
some development using Exceed.



> >Ya, Hummingbird Communications has been doing this for awhile. Its fair,
> but no where compares to the Linux OS. Linux X11 emulating a MS environment
> is more
> >stable than MS Windows emulating a X11 Linux environment. NT crashes (BSOD)
> too much when pushed by heavy apps.
> > http://www.hummingbird.com/products/nc/exceed/index.html

> Exceed is simply an X windowing evironment for Windows, it is hardly an
> emulator for UNIX.

 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by Adam P. Jenki » Wed, 03 Feb 1999 04:00:00


Exceed is just an X server.  This means that while it can allow X apps
to display on a Windows machine, the apps have to actually be running
on a Unix machine, or actually be ported to Windows with a Windows
version of Xlib.  I've used it and I never had NT crash because of it.
It's a useful thing to have on a network with both Unix and NT
workstations, but it's not a replacement for Unix.  It can't run Unix
binaries on NT.

Adam


> What is the difference between the two? We run the FEA app EMRC/NISA Display 3
> v8.0 with Exceed 6.01 which is a Unix app. Just curious about the differences
> between the term "environment" and "emulator". We also have programmers doing
> some development using Exceed.




> > >Ya, Hummingbird Communications has been doing this for awhile. Its fair,
> > but no where compares to the Linux OS. Linux X11 emulating a MS environment
> > is more
> > >stable than MS Windows emulating a X11 Linux environment. NT crashes (BSOD)
> > too much when pushed by heavy apps.
> > > http://www.hummingbird.com/products/nc/exceed/index.html

> > Exceed is simply an X windowing evironment for Windows, it is hardly an
> > emulator for UNIX.

--
Adam P. Jenkins

 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by Matthias Wark » Wed, 03 Feb 1999 04:00:00


It was the 2 Feb 1999 15:58:39 GMT...

[Unix emulator on Windows 2000]

Quote:> They have a limited list of things they want ported such as gcc (all compilers and assemblers) and emacs and Tex to name a few.

All of these are already ported and run natively on Windows NT.
How moronic can one become?

mawa
--

My Geek Code is no longer in my .signature. It's available on e-mail request.
It's sad to live in a world where knowing how to program your VCR actually
lowers your social status...

 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by M Sweg » Thu, 04 Feb 1999 04:00:00



: Exceed is just an X server.  This means that while it can allow X apps
: to display on a Windows machine, the apps have to actually be running
: on a Unix machine, or actually be ported to Windows with a Windows
: version of Xlib.  I've used it and I never had NT crash because of it.
: It's a useful thing to have on a network with both Unix and NT
: workstations, but it's not a replacement for Unix.  It can't run Unix
: binaries on NT.

Although X-Windows is specific to Unix, Exceed is just a port of the
Unix X-WIndows server to the NT Os and runs natively (in other
words was compiled with Msoft tools and API's) vs. interix which would
run a shell within NT so that Unix apps could run within it. Of course
the Unix apps would have to be recompiled if they are static vs. dynamic
with respect to the libraries. The reason is, is that their stuff can
be considered a dynamic library that maps Unix OS API calls to NT OS
API calls, thus making the OS transparent to the Unix app.
So I guess in summary their stuff acts like a Uni emulator within Windows
by either or both providing a dynamic library/API mapping s/w package
and a shell that traps or allows Unix to run within its own environment.

--
        Mike,

 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by Jeremy Mathe » Thu, 04 Feb 1999 04:00:00




Quote:>Exceed is just an X server.  This means that while it can allow X apps
>to display on a Windows machine, the apps have to actually be running
>on a Unix machine, or actually be ported to Windows with a Windows
>version of Xlib.  I've used it and I never had NT crash because of it.
>It's a useful thing to have on a network with both Unix and NT
>workstations, but it's not a replacement for Unix.  It can't run Unix
>binaries on NT.

Right on all counts (obviously).

But the point is that the general public (including at least one
poster to this NG) can't tell the difference between an X server
implementation and a "Unix emulator" anyway, so, in the spirit of
"Perception  == Reality", there really is no difference.

My guess is that the original press report exists for one purpose
only - to give MS at least the veneer of an excuse to claim in its own
press releases that Win2K runs Linux apps.  And, best of all, if they
are ever pressed on the issue, they can just produce an X server
implementation (of which there are already several - N.B., there's
nothing unique or kewl about Exceed) to back up their claims.

 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by Steven Jame » Thu, 04 Feb 1999 04:00:00



> Hmmm! if you can't get the Unix software vendors to port their stuf from Unix
> to Window Nt, then make the Unix apps run within NT! In this way you can
> say that your OS is a engineering workstation.

That's just funny!
I looked at their prices etc. Let's see, I can pay thousands of dollars
to run my linux apps on flaky NT,
or I can just BUY a second PC (with all options), and run my Linux apps
on stable Linux for the same or less money...hmm, real tough choice
there! :->

G'day,
sjames

 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by Adam P. Jenki » Thu, 04 Feb 1999 04:00:00





> >Exceed is just an X server.  This means that while it can allow X apps
> >to display on a Windows machine, the apps have to actually be running
> >on a Unix machine, or actually be ported to Windows with a Windows
> >version of Xlib.  I've used it and I never had NT crash because of it.
> >It's a useful thing to have on a network with both Unix and NT
> >workstations, but it's not a replacement for Unix.  It can't run Unix
> >binaries on NT.

> Right on all counts (obviously).

> But the point is that the general public (including at least one
> poster to this NG) can't tell the difference between an X server
> implementation and a "Unix emulator" anyway, so, in the spirit of
> "Perception  == Reality", there really is no difference.

But there is a very big difference in "Reality" between an X server
and "Unix emulator".  With just an X server, you still need to own and
operate a machine running Unix to run Unix apps.  If you had a Unix
emulator, presumably that means you could get Unix apps and just run
them on your NT machine.  The sysadmin may be able to write some kewl
scripts so that an end-user on the NT machine doesn't realize they're
starting an X app, but that still only accounts for GUI Unix apps; to
start a non-gui Unix app you'd still need to actually log into the
Unix machine, whereas if you had a Unix emulator you could just run
them on your NT machine too.

--
Adam P. Jenkins

 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by D. J. Bircha » Fri, 05 Feb 1999 04:00:00



Quote:>to start a non-gui Unix app you'd still need to actually log into the
>Unix machine, whereas if you had a Unix emulator you could just run
>them on your NT machine too.

I have to wonder what sort of performance an NT system emulating
UNIX would deliver.  Has anyone played with this?

-Dan

--
Daniel Birchall, VP - Technology, Digital Facilities Management.

since a bunch of illiterates spammed it! :)  My username is djb.
http://www.scream.org/maisha/ is the Unofficial Maisha Fan Site.

 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by Peter Samuels » Mon, 08 Feb 1999 04:00:00



Quote:> Although X-Windows is specific to Unix

Tell that to Digital (well, Compaq), who have been selling X clients
and servers under VMS for years.  The point of X is that, like TCP/IP,
it is designed to be pretty much platform-*transparent*.  In fact it is
even network-transparent; assuming your OS has the necessary underlying
support, it can run comfortably on TCP/IP, Unix domain sockets and
DECnet.  (And maybe others; those are the ones I know about.)

The X libraries have been ported to NT; it's just that pretty much
nobody bothers to port, compile and run X clients on NT.

Quote:> Exceed is just a port of the Unix X-WIndows server to the NT Os and
> runs natively (in other words was compiled with Msoft tools and
> API's) vs. interix which would run a shell within NT so that Unix
> apps could run within it.

Basically as I understand it Interix provides an alternative API to
the Win32, Win16 and OS/2 modules NT comes with.  And apparently it
does not interact too seamlessly with Win32 (and other) apps.

Thanks but no thanks.  If I wanted a slow Unix clone that isn't really
very Unixy and runs on a bloated microkernel, I'd use the Hurd.  (Not
really making a comparison here.  No offense to Hurd people.)

--
Peter Samuelson
<sampo.creighton.edu!psamuels>

 
 
 

Linux apps in win2000 port news!

Post by Matthew Hannig » Tue, 09 Feb 1999 04:00:00





>>to start a non-gui Unix app you'd still need to actually log into the
>>Unix machine, whereas if you had a Unix emulator you could just run
>>them on your NT machine too.

>I have to wonder what sort of performance an NT system emulating
>UNIX would deliver.  Has anyone played with this?

Well, since it is not an emulator, probably pretty good.

You can ask Interix for a demo copy and try it yourself.

It is an native implementation of the Unix/Posix API and utilities.

Emulator is usualy the wrong word for these sort of things,
and should reserved for hardware emulation.

Wine Is Not an Emulator either.

--
        -Matt

 
 
 

1. Windows NT|2000 Linux 2.2 port (was Linux apps in win2000 port news!)

For about two months, I've been busy working away at the possibility of a
native NT microkernel version of a Linux server. It's definitely doable. I'm
collecting information at the moment. I was sort of hoping until I had some
code (typical bizarre project style), but since Interix have beat the OSS
community to the punch, I may as well announce it now.

I'm looking at making the linux server (subsystem) at least passingly
similar to the current 2.2 tree, so that changes could be merged in there
closer . The goal obviously is to run native Linux x86 and Alpha binaries
(depending on platform) without recompilation.

My current idea is for a %windir%\linux\... tree that contains a vmlinux.exe
and the standard linux file system standard and enough stuff to launch bash.
Once launched, the server launches linux images as normal. A
modification/complete re-write of umsdos would provide the file system (or
maybe just use ext2fs until this is a bit more of a reality). By making a
directX fbconsole layer, we could re-use the frame buffer console code as it
exists today. X would come (much) later, but again via the use of the XAA
layer in XFree86 4.0 (I know it doesn't yet exist, but I helped write the
early 3.9 stuff, so I know it does exist :-)

The native NT api is exceptionally well hidden and undocumented, but
NT/W2k's microkernel is as least as good as Mach in all respects (and memory
and thread management, it's significantly better), so a mklinux server port
wouldn't take more than a year with dedicated people.

 If anyone's interested please drop me a line. You'd need to have a compiler
and a passing knowledge of Windows NT/2000 to be useful at this stage. I'm
going to use Visual C++ until I can prove to myself that cygnus's (or other)
gcc under WIn32 can do the job. The reason for this is the header files,
which are vital to Win32 development.

Andrew

2. _What_ do I do?!?

3. news: Win2000 has 63,000 'defects'

4. hp 812c printer setup

5. ===HELP: How to port UNIX + Motif client/server app to a WWW app ?? ===

6. ALOM; License for Test Server

7. Need help porting DOS app that uses parallel port

8. linux-2.1.122 and nfsroot via dhcpd BOOTP

9. Serial Port Multiplexing (2 apps to 1 port)

10. Need help porting DOS app that uses parallel port (Part II)

11. News, News, News!

12. Sherlock linux plug-ins / sherlock for linux?

13. License for porting apps to linux distributions