4 ms·
Imagine going back in time to the 90s and telling people that in 2016 Microsoft would bend over backwards to make sure Windows could run Linux ELF binaries nati
by omarforgotpwd 11y ago
Imagine going back in time to the 90s and telling people that in 2016 Microsoft would bend over backwards to make sure Windows could run Linux ELF binaries natively in the kernel by converting syscalls. You'd probably be laughed at.
- jacquesm 11y agoNo, they'd point to Kerberos and ask what the difference is.
- brlewis 11y agoMicrosoft wasn't trying very hard to make their Kerberos compatible with MIT Kerberos, at least in the mid '90s. I think you'd still be laughed at, especially since Windows was ubiquitous, Unix was niche, and Linux was a niche within a niche.
- keeperofdakeys 11y agoThey'd laugh, because NT already had posix system calls http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki/contents/articles/10224.posix-and-unix-support-in-windows.aspx http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki/contents/articles/1...
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- omarforgotpwd 11y agoPOSIX calls, which have always been there but require a recompiled binary, are different than the binary compatibility announced today. This additional step is actually quite an impressive feat of software engineering. To think that Microsoft would care so much about maintaining compatibility would have seemed ridiculous just a few years ago.
- cyphar 11y agoIt should be noted that FreeBSD has had this for a decade AFAIK, and LX-branded Zones have been massively improved in SmartOS.