MinC is a compact, self-contained POSIX-compliant shell environment for Windows, distinct from Cygwin. It focuses on providing a minimal but functional core of essential Unix utilities, prioritizing speed, small size, and easy integration with native Windows programs. Unlike Cygwin, which aims for a comprehensive Unix-like layer, MinC eschews emulating a full environment, making it faster and lighter. It achieves this by leveraging existing Windows functionality where possible and relying on busybox for its core utilities. This approach makes MinC particularly suitable for tasks like scripting and automation within a Windows context, where a full-fledged Unix environment might be overkill.
This book, "Introduction to System Programming in Linux," offers a practical, project-based approach to learning low-level Linux programming. It covers essential concepts like process management, memory allocation, inter-process communication (using pipes, message queues, and shared memory), file I/O, and multithreading. The book emphasizes hands-on learning through coding examples and projects, guiding readers in building their own mini-shell, a multithreaded web server, and a key-value store. It aims to provide a solid foundation for developing system software, embedded systems, and performance-sensitive applications on Linux.
Hacker News users discuss the value of the "Introduction to System Programming in Linux" book, particularly for beginners. Some commenters highlight the importance of Kay Robbins and Dave Robbins' previous work, expressing excitement for this new release. Others debate the book's relevance given the wealth of free online resources, although some counter that a well-structured book can be more valuable than scattered web tutorials. Several commenters express interest in seeing more practical examples and projects within the book, particularly those focusing on modern systems and real-world applications. Finally, there's a brief discussion about alternative learning resources, including the Linux Programming Interface and Beej's Guide.
The Ncurses library provides an API for creating text-based user interfaces in a terminal-independent manner. It handles screen painting, input, and window management, abstracting away low-level details like terminal capabilities. Ncurses builds upon the older Curses library, offering enhancements and broader compatibility. Key features include window creation and manipulation, formatted output with color and attributes, handling keyboard and mouse input, and supporting various terminal types. The library simplifies tasks like creating menus, dialog boxes, and other interactive elements commonly found in text-based applications. By using Ncurses, developers can write portable code that works across different operating systems and terminal emulators without modification.
Hacker News users discussing the ncurses intro document generally praised it as a good resource, especially for beginners. Some appreciated the historical context provided, while others highlighted the clarity and practicality of the tutorial. One commenter mentioned using it to learn ncurses for a project, showcasing its real-world applicability. Several comments pointed out modern alternatives like FTXUI (C++) and blessed-contrib (JS), acknowledging ncurses' age but also its continued relevance and wide usage in existing tools. A few users discussed the benefits of text-based UIs, citing speed, remote accessibility, and lower resource requirements.
PEP 486 introduces a mechanism for the Python launcher for Windows (py.exe) to automatically detect and use virtual environments. It proposes a new file, .venv, in a directory, signaling to the launcher that it's a virtual environment. When invoked from within such a directory, py.exe will prioritize the associated environment's interpreter over globally installed versions. This simplifies virtual environment usage by removing the need to manually activate them before running Python scripts, providing a more seamless user experience.
Hacker News users discussed the benefits and drawbacks of PEP 486, which makes the Python launcher aware of virtual environments. Several commenters appreciated the simplified workflow and reduced reliance on activating environments explicitly. Some highlighted potential confusion around environment selection, particularly with identically named environments in different locations. The discussion also touched on the launcher's behavior on Windows versus Unix-like systems and the potential impact on existing tools and workflows that rely on the previous behavior. A few users expressed skepticism about the necessity of the PEP, suggesting alternative approaches or highlighting the adequacy of existing tools.
Summary of Comments ( 121 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43770445
Several Hacker News commenters discuss the differences between MinC and Cygwin, primarily focusing on MinC's smaller footprint and simpler approach. Some highlight MinC's benefit for embedded systems or minimal environments where a full Cygwin installation would be overkill. Others mention the licensing differences and the potential advantages of MinC's more permissive BSD license. A few commenters also express interest in the project and its potential applications, while one points out a typo in the original article. The overall sentiment leans towards appreciation for MinC's minimalist philosophy and its suitability for specific use cases.
The Hacker News post "MinC Is Not Cygwin" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43770445) discussing the MinC project (a minimalist Cygwin-like environment for Windows) has several comments exploring its purpose, benefits, and drawbacks compared to Cygwin and other similar solutions.
One commenter highlights MinC's value proposition: providing a smaller, simpler alternative to Cygwin, particularly for those needing only a limited set of Unix utilities on Windows. They acknowledge that Cygwin offers broader compatibility but emphasize that MinC caters to users who prioritize a lighter footprint and faster execution for specific tasks.
Another comment delves into the technical differences, pointing out that MinC uses native Windows executables where possible, unlike Cygwin, which relies on a compatibility layer. This approach reportedly contributes to MinC's performance advantage. However, the commenter also notes the limitations arising from this design, such as the challenges in handling fork() system calls, a fundamental aspect of Unix-like operating systems.
The discussion also touches upon alternative solutions like MSYS2 and Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL). Commenters suggest that these options might offer a more robust and complete Unix-like environment, though potentially at the cost of increased complexity and resource usage. The original author of MinC joins the conversation, clarifying their motivation for creating the project: a dissatisfaction with the perceived "bloat" of Cygwin for their specific needs. They emphasize MinC's role as a highly specialized tool, acknowledging its unsuitability as a full Cygwin replacement.
The thread explores the implications of MinC's design choices, including its handling of file paths and its compatibility with native Windows programs. One commenter raises a potential concern about the maintainability of MinC due to its reliance on specific Windows versions and the possibility of future compatibility issues. Others appreciate the project's minimalist philosophy, viewing it as a practical solution for targeted tasks.
Overall, the comments offer a balanced perspective on MinC, acknowledging its strengths in providing a lightweight, performant alternative to Cygwin for limited use cases, while also recognizing its limitations and suggesting alternative solutions for users requiring a more comprehensive Unix-like environment on Windows.