Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Linux and Windows andLinux

<< < (4/5) > >>

tinjaw:
Well, I've been running it for a week or so. Intensive use (actually thinking of abandoning windows forever).

It's as starble as a stand-alone version, I'd say.
-urlwolf (March 23, 2008, 03:39 PM)
--- End quote ---

Thanks for the report.

The only thing that may act funny is the X server (but that's independent of the andlinux install; it's Xming). Xming is under active development, so bugs are expected. I had some problems with swing applications.
-urlwolf (March 23, 2008, 03:39 PM)
--- End quote ---

Yes. Dependencies are always a pain when they aren't stable.

tinjaw, you are a dev; you owe it to yourself to try it. The command line experience under windows is plain painful. if you use it at all, you will be relieved under linux (you know that).
-urlwolf (March 23, 2008, 03:39 PM)
--- End quote ---

Oh I've got plenty of non-standard stuff at my fingertips. I run Linux all the time. And on Window boxes I have Cygwin, native Windows ports of GNU software, and lately I run a lot of iPython as my shell.

f0dder:
sorry. the question is: if linux is 'just a process' from windows' perspective, then maybe it can live on one core only. That'd mean that you are wasting your second core (no matter how many linux processes are claiming the CPU) if you develop using andlinux on windows.-urlwolf (March 23, 2008, 08:56 PM)
--- End quote ---
Unless coLinux has deliberate limits, you will be able to use your cores just fine... and I would be surprised if coLinux doesn't do translation of the threading APIs :)

tinjaw:
sorry. the question is: if linux is 'just a process' from windows' perspective, then maybe it can live on one core only.
-urlwolf (March 23, 2008, 08:56 PM)
--- End quote ---

One process doesn't mean one thread. Threads should load balance just fine across multiple cores.

"Portability

Unlike User Mode Linux, coLinux always utilizes only one process of the host OS for all its Linux processes, privately managing their scheduling, resources, and faults in a manner which is contained and entirely independent of the way the host OS is implemented. In fact, coLinux only requires a very small set of commonly exported primitives from the host OS kernel in order to work, thus, it can be rather easily ported to run under any operating system, such as Solaris, or even Linux itself."-Cooperative Linux
--- End quote ---

urlwolf:
Great.
Tinjaw, I copied the exact same paragraph and was going to post it here :)

One more question is about partitions.
andlinux uses cofs to mount ntfs partitions. it works well.
However, maybe it's even better to create linux partitions and mount them natively. It seems that windows can see an ext2/3 partitions well enough:

http://www.fs-driver.org/faq.html

However, it worries me that maybe ext3 is not that well supported:
If you mount an Ext3 file system as an Ext2 file system and the file system is not cleanly dismounted, (e.g. due to a system crash), you have to run the e2fsck tool. (Linux does it automatically.) Running e2fsck can take several hours on large volumes. You do not benefit from journaling the Ext3 file system, because you have to run e2fsck.
--- End quote ---

So my question is: should I create a data partition as NTFS and use cofs, or is it better to make it ext3 and force windows to see it with these drivers?

I'm looking for best performance with many small files. WHich is better, ntfs or ext3?

Other options (JFS, XFS) are not that well supported on win (there are drivers but not reliable)

Thanks

f0dder:
Hm, only uses a single windows process to contain all the linux apps? Dunno if that sounds like such a great idea. But as long as it at least uses multiple windows threads inside that single process...

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page