5 ms·

Sorry for the ignorance, but what does this mean? I understand from the article that the patch allows the full Hyper-V stack to run on a linux-based machine (as

Sorry for the ignorance, but what does this mean? I understand from the article that the patch allows the full Hyper-V stack to run on a linux-based machine (as opposed to previously needing windows to run the root partition). But what does _that_ mean to have the ability to run Hyper-V entirely on linux? Is it just a "good to have options" thing?

flightllessbird 6y ago
It allows them to run a bare metal (type 1) hypervisor instead of a VM on top of Windows.
- quietbritishjim 6y ago
  Hyper-V already is a bare metal (type 1) hypervisor. Admittedly it does use one (or more) of the guests, called the "parent partition", to handle some of the work for it. This change allows that parent partition to be Linux instead of Windows, but it does not make it any more of a bare metal hypervisor than it was before, unless you know something in addition to what the article says.
SQueeeeeL 6y ago
It probably means they want to leverage out the existing open source VM software so they can make one with proprietary Windows support (at some point down the line). There is a long history of this in the past with Microsoft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis... Everyone should be afraid of this, even the Microsoft employees commenting here. Look at the 737 MAX post on the front page for another example of management corrupting engineering
- cycloptic 6y ago
  >Everyone should be afraid Please don't FUD like this. Proprietary systems on top of Linux are nothing new and Microsoft certainly isn't the first company to have done it. If you have some real proof of their business plans then let's hear that rather than encouraging speculation and fearmongering.
  - de_watcher 6y ago
    It's not FUD. It's the Microsoft's never-changing strategy. I don't know how many times people need to experience it to remember this.
    - cycloptic 6y ago
      That strategy has also failed them numerous times and resulted in complete flops. Sorry I am just really sick of the senseless Microsoft bashing that tends to pervade Linux communities. If you have some real reason to criticize them based on current behavior then let's hear that. Anything else is speculation.
      - rightbyte 6y ago
        There is no MS lovehate anymore from Linux community in my experience since the rise of the greater evils went under the radar as hipp. Sadly MS is on the course joining the Google and Facebook in this regard.
    - whereistimbo 6y ago
      Whatever Embrace Extend Extinguish is Microsoft doing, all the patch were open source and licensed under GPL. If VMWare's patch to make Linux run in VMWare closed source hypervisor getting mainlined, why not this one?
    - thsowers 6y ago
      I think it is uncharitable to assert that a company that is 45 years old has a strategy that is "never-changing". There is no denying that Microsoft has been hostile to Linux and open source efforts before, but it doesn't mean that this would never change. Last I checked, Microsoft was the largest contributor to open source projects, and Satya Nadella seems to embrace FOSS
      - fartcannon 6y ago
        I don't see what they've done to earn your trust. You just want to believe theyre different, just like the parent wants to believe theyre not. The truth is probably in the middle.
- whereistimbo 6y ago
  Or maybe the Hyper-V team sees that Windows as the only host that Hyper-V support as a liability. Look at [0], you need 16 hours to compile Windows in 64 bit superfast workstation w/ hundreds of GB memory, which would be frustrating and annoying, if they just want to improve Hyper-V and testing, working w/ Linux would be much faster since it compiles within minutes on standard dev machine with adequate RAM. [0]: https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-about-open-sourcing-Windows-and-getting-rid-of-the-licensing-code/answer/Axel-Rietschin?share=1 https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-about-open-sourcing-...
  - fomine3 6y ago
    Windows contains not only kernel but also many components like stdlibs, daemons, graphics, basic apps, and so on. So you should compare compiling time for Linux, glibc, systemd, X/Wayland, GNOME, wpa_supplicant, PulseAudio and so on.
- mlindner 6y ago
  Linking policies from decades ago isn't helpful.

flightllessbird 6y ago

It allows them to run a bare metal (type 1) hypervisor instead of a VM on top of Windows.

quietbritishjim 6y ago
Hyper-V already is a bare metal (type 1) hypervisor. Admittedly it does use one (or more) of the guests, called the "parent partition", to handle some of the work for it. This change allows that parent partition to be Linux instead of Windows, but it does not make it any more of a bare metal hypervisor than it was before, unless you know something in addition to what the article says.

SQueeeeeL 6y ago

It probably means they want to leverage out the existing open source VM software so they can make one with proprietary Windows support (at some point down the line). There is a long history of this in the past with Microsoft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis... Everyone should be afraid of this, even the Microsoft employees commenting here. Look at the 737 MAX post on the front page for another example of management corrupting engineering

cycloptic 6y ago
>Everyone should be afraid Please don't FUD like this. Proprietary systems on top of Linux are nothing new and Microsoft certainly isn't the first company to have done it. If you have some real proof of their business plans then let's hear that rather than encouraging speculation and fearmongering.
- de_watcher 6y ago
  It's not FUD. It's the Microsoft's never-changing strategy. I don't know how many times people need to experience it to remember this.
  - cycloptic 6y ago
    That strategy has also failed them numerous times and resulted in complete flops. Sorry I am just really sick of the senseless Microsoft bashing that tends to pervade Linux communities. If you have some real reason to criticize them based on current behavior then let's hear that. Anything else is speculation.
    - rightbyte 6y ago
      There is no MS lovehate anymore from Linux community in my experience since the rise of the greater evils went under the radar as hipp. Sadly MS is on the course joining the Google and Facebook in this regard.
  - whereistimbo 6y ago
    Whatever Embrace Extend Extinguish is Microsoft doing, all the patch were open source and licensed under GPL. If VMWare's patch to make Linux run in VMWare closed source hypervisor getting mainlined, why not this one?
  - thsowers 6y ago
    I think it is uncharitable to assert that a company that is 45 years old has a strategy that is "never-changing". There is no denying that Microsoft has been hostile to Linux and open source efforts before, but it doesn't mean that this would never change. Last I checked, Microsoft was the largest contributor to open source projects, and Satya Nadella seems to embrace FOSS
    - fartcannon 6y ago
      I don't see what they've done to earn your trust. You just want to believe theyre different, just like the parent wants to believe theyre not. The truth is probably in the middle.
whereistimbo 6y ago
Or maybe the Hyper-V team sees that Windows as the only host that Hyper-V support as a liability. Look at [0], you need 16 hours to compile Windows in 64 bit superfast workstation w/ hundreds of GB memory, which would be frustrating and annoying, if they just want to improve Hyper-V and testing, working w/ Linux would be much faster since it compiles within minutes on standard dev machine with adequate RAM. [0]: https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-about-open-sourcing-Windows-and-getting-rid-of-the-licensing-code/answer/Axel-Rietschin?share=1 https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-about-open-sourcing-...
- fomine3 6y ago
  Windows contains not only kernel but also many components like stdlibs, daemons, graphics, basic apps, and so on. So you should compare compiling time for Linux, glibc, systemd, X/Wayland, GNOME, wpa_supplicant, PulseAudio and so on.
mlindner 6y ago
Linking policies from decades ago isn't helpful.