Remix.run Logo
rahen 4 hours ago

Before WSL, the best ways to run unmodified Linux binaries inside Windows were CoLinux and flinux.

http://www.colinux.org/

https://github.com/wishstudio/flinux

flinux essentially had the architecture of WSL1, while CoLinux was more like WSL2 with a Linux kernel side-loaded.

Cygwin was technically the correct approach: native POSIX binaries on Windows rather than hacking in some foreign Linux plumbing. Since it was merely a lightweight DLL to link to (or a bunch of them), it also kept the cruft low without messing with ring 0.

However, it lacked the convenience of a CLI package manager back then, and I remember being hooked on CoLinux when I had to work on Windows.

Fnoord 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Cygwin is way older than CoLinux. CoLinux is from 2004. Cygwin was first released in 1995.

The problem with Cygwin as I remember it was DLL hell. You'd have applications (such as a OpenSSH port for Windows) which would include their own cygwin1.dll and then you'd have issues with different versions of said DLL.

Cygwin had less overhead which mattered in a world of limited RAM and heavy, limited swapping (x86-32, limited I/O, PATA, ...).

Those constraints also meant native applications instead of Web 2.0 NodeJS and what not. Java specifically had a bad name, and back then not even a coherent UI toolkit.

As always: two steps forward, one step back.

toast0 8 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> Java specifically had a bad name, and back then not even a coherent UI toolkit.

Java was ahead of its time, now nothing has a coherent UI toolkit.

barrkel 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Just use ssh from Cygwin. DLL hell was rarely a problem, just always install everything via setup.exe.

The single biggest problem it has is slow forking. I learned to write my scripts in pure bash as much as possible, or as a composition of streaming executables, and avoid executing an executable per line of input or similar.

fc417fc802 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Slow forking is only the second biggest problem IMO. The biggest is the lack of proper signals. There's a bunch of software out there that just isn't architected to work well without non-cooperative preemption.

quotemstr an hour ago | parent [-]

Huh? Signals have worked fine for a long time under Cygwin.

johnmaguire 17 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Cygwin had less overhead which mattered in a world of limited RAM and heavy, limited swapping (x86-32, limited I/O, PATA, ...).

Maybe so, but my memory of Cygwin was waiting multiple seconds just for the Cygwin CLI prompt to load. It was very slow on my machines.

pjmlp 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Meanwhile those that complained about Java, now ship a whole browser with their "native" application, and then complain about Google taking over the Web.

DaSHacka 19 minutes ago | parent [-]

I think those are two solidly different camps of people

radiator 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nowadays MSYS2, which does depend on cygwin under the hood, offers such a package manager (pacman of Arch Linux) and it is quite a user friendly to run native POSIX binaries on Windows without a linux VM.

ethin 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

In my personal experience, Msys 2 would work great until it didn't. Unless this has changed, from what I remember, Msys2 compiled everything without PIC/PIE, and Windows does allow you to configure, system-wide, whether ASLR is used, and whether it's used "if supported" or always. If that setting is set to anything but off, Msys2 binaries will randomly crash with heap allocation errors, or they do on my system. It happened so much to me when I had actual coreutils installed that I switched to uutils-coreutils even though I knew that uutils-coreutils has some discrepancies/issues. Idk if they've fixed that bug or not; I did ask them once why they didn't just allow full ASLR and get on with things and they claimed that they needed to do non-ASLR compilations for docker.

ktm5j 44 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

MSYS2 is my favorite in this area. Super lightweight and easy to use, highly recommend.

anthk 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

w64devkit it's fine too; with just a few PATH settings and SDL2 libraries I could even compile UXN and some small SDl2 bound emulators.

https://github.com/skeeto/w64devkit

red_admiral 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Developing on cygwin, however, was a right pain. If a C library you wanted to use didn't have a pre-built cygwin version (understandable!) then you end up doing 'configure, make' on everything in the dependency tree, and from memory about two thirds of the time you had to edit something because it's not quite POSIX enough sometimes.

smackeyacky 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Ha ha doing Unix like it was 1989. At the time I thought configure was the greatest of human achievements since I was distributing software amongst Sun machines of varying vintage and a Pyramid. I want to say good times but I prefer now ha ha

jesuslop 2 hours ago | parent [-]

autotools felt old even in 90's

barrkel 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Cygwin implements a POSIX API on Win32 with a smattering of Nt* calls to improve compatibility but there's a lot of hoop jumping and hackery to get the right semantics. Fork isn't copy on write, for one thing.

I was a Cygwin user from about 1999 to 2022 or so, spent a little time on wsl2 (and it's what I still use on my laptop) but I'm fully Linux on the desktop since last year.

firesteelrain 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I thought WSL2 is functionally a virtual machine with deep host integration. That’s why you need HyperV.

NeutralWanted 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Sort of. Technically speaking, just enabling hyper-v turns your base windows install into a VM. Wsl2 then just runs along side

pjmlp 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nope, the best way was VMWare Workstation, followed by Virtual Box.

pmontra 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I've been running colinux for years until early 2009 when I reinstalled my laptop with Ubuntu 8.04 and Windows XP in a VM. So much faster.

EvanAnderson 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

On Windows NT building software from source under Interix[0] (nee OpenNT, later "Subsystem for Unix Applications") was pretty nice.

Interix was implemented as proper NT kernel "subsystem". It was just another build target for GNU automake, for example.

(Being that Interix was a real kernel subsystem I have this fever dream idea of a text-mode "distribution" of NT running w/o any Win32 subsystem.)

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interix

charcircuit an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

>Cygwin was technically the correct approach

Requiring every single Linux app developer to recompile their app using Cygwin and account for quirks that it may have is not the correct approach. Having Microsoft handle all of the compatibility concerns scales much better.