5 ms·

I quit using Windows as my primary desktop because of lack of SSH support.

by pschlump 9y ago

icedchai 9y ago
Was there a problem installing Putty?
- asendra 9y ago
  Yes. Putty.
  - icedchai 9y ago
    Strange. I never had a problem with it 10 years ago. Perhaps our expectations for a terminal have changed in that time.
    - samfisher83 9y ago
      Putty works fine. You can even do x11 forwarding or socks proxing. If you have an x11 server running on your machine you can have a linux display.
- PascLeRasc 9y ago
  Putty's been being distributed over unsecured HTTP for years - I wouldn't be surprised if some companies' IT departments forbid it.
  - ac29 9y ago
    The main page [0] and main download [1] are HTTPS. GPG signatures are provided as well. [0] https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/latest.html https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/latest.ht... [1] https://the.earth.li/~sgtatham/putty/latest/w64/putty-64bit-0.70-installer.msi https://the.earth.li/~sgtatham/putty/latest/w64/putty-64bit-...
    - lostmsu 9y ago
      That probably changed just recently.
  - icedchai 9y ago
    Downloading something over HTTPS doesn't magically make it secure.
rbanffy 9y ago
I did out of irritation the nth time I wanted to delete a file that it insisted was open (which should not be a problem anyway).
- ksk 9y ago
  >(which should not be a problem anyway). But it is a problem. And also a difference in philosophy. NTFS gives the user and the process the guarantee that the filesystem will remain consistent. Also as a user, I have a guarantee that the file I have open, represents a file that actually exists on the file system, and not a deleted file.
  - CyberShadow 9y ago
    This is not relevant to the on-disk filesystem, just how the OS handles files. The philosophy is also flawed: open a file, then create a hard link to it. You now can't delete that hard link (because the file is open), even though you just created it. This is not a problem on POSIX because it correctly distinguishes a file name (represented by a directory entry) from a file (represented by the inode).
    - ksk 9y ago
      Its not clear to me what "flaw" you're referring to. NTFS is reference counted and can easily accommodate other behaviors. By default, it prevents deletion, unless a process specifically permits deletion, in which case, the file can be deleted. This makes a whole lot of sense to me as a user, because I don't want to worry about open files being possibly deleted from disk. >open a file, then create a hard link to it. You now can't delete that hard link (because the file is open), even though you just created it. This is not a problem on POSIX because it correctly distinguishes a file name (represented by a directory entry) from a file (represented by the inode). This is not relevant to the topic.
      - CyberShadow 9y ago
        It is absolutely relevant. In your very comment, you are confusing what a file and a file name is. To rephrase: just because the FILE is open, doesn't mean that you shouldn't be able to remove a FILE NAME that references the FILE. > as a user, because I don't want to worry about open files being possibly deleted from disk Open files can still usually be renamed (and moved across the same volume), so a file name of an open file can still be effectively removed.

I quit using Windows as my primary desktop because of lack of SSH support.

icedchai 9y ago

Was there a problem installing Putty?

asendra 9y ago
Yes. Putty.
- icedchai 9y ago
  Strange. I never had a problem with it 10 years ago. Perhaps our expectations for a terminal have changed in that time.
  - samfisher83 9y ago
    Putty works fine. You can even do x11 forwarding or socks proxing. If you have an x11 server running on your machine you can have a linux display.
PascLeRasc 9y ago
Putty's been being distributed over unsecured HTTP for years - I wouldn't be surprised if some companies' IT departments forbid it.
- ac29 9y ago
  The main page [0] and main download [1] are HTTPS. GPG signatures are provided as well. [0] https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/latest.html https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/latest.ht... [1] https://the.earth.li/~sgtatham/putty/latest/w64/putty-64bit-0.70-installer.msi https://the.earth.li/~sgtatham/putty/latest/w64/putty-64bit-...
  - lostmsu 9y ago
    That probably changed just recently.
- icedchai 9y ago
  Downloading something over HTTPS doesn't magically make it secure.

rbanffy 9y ago

I did out of irritation the nth time I wanted to delete a file that it insisted was open (which should not be a problem anyway).

ksk 9y ago
>(which should not be a problem anyway). But it is a problem. And also a difference in philosophy. NTFS gives the user and the process the guarantee that the filesystem will remain consistent. Also as a user, I have a guarantee that the file I have open, represents a file that actually exists on the file system, and not a deleted file.
- CyberShadow 9y ago
  This is not relevant to the on-disk filesystem, just how the OS handles files. The philosophy is also flawed: open a file, then create a hard link to it. You now can't delete that hard link (because the file is open), even though you just created it. This is not a problem on POSIX because it correctly distinguishes a file name (represented by a directory entry) from a file (represented by the inode).
  - ksk 9y ago
    Its not clear to me what "flaw" you're referring to. NTFS is reference counted and can easily accommodate other behaviors. By default, it prevents deletion, unless a process specifically permits deletion, in which case, the file can be deleted. This makes a whole lot of sense to me as a user, because I don't want to worry about open files being possibly deleted from disk. >open a file, then create a hard link to it. You now can't delete that hard link (because the file is open), even though you just created it. This is not a problem on POSIX because it correctly distinguishes a file name (represented by a directory entry) from a file (represented by the inode). This is not relevant to the topic.
    - CyberShadow 9y ago
      It is absolutely relevant. In your very comment, you are confusing what a file and a file name is. To rephrase: just because the FILE is open, doesn't mean that you shouldn't be able to remove a FILE NAME that references the FILE. > as a user, because I don't want to worry about open files being possibly deleted from disk Open files can still usually be renamed (and moved across the same volume), so a file name of an open file can still be effectively removed.