Support this and other development on Patreon

Stories with Tag Operating System

Disabling kernel functions in your process (2009)

permalink

Posted: 2025-05-21 02:22:25

The blog post describes a method to disable specific kernel functions within a user-space process by intercepting system calls. It leverages the ptrace system call to attach to a process, modify its system call table entries to point to a custom function, and then detach. The custom function can then choose to emulate the original kernel function, return an error, or perform other actions, effectively blocking or altering the behavior of targeted system calls for the specified process. This technique allows for granular control over kernel interactions within a user-space process, potentially useful for security sandboxing or debugging.

Chad Austin's 2009 blog post, "Disabling kernel functions in your process," explores a technique for selectively restricting a process's access to specific kernel system calls on Linux. This method provides a more granular approach to security than traditional, all-or-nothing methods like chroot jails, offering finer control over a process's capabilities and potentially mitigating the impact of vulnerabilities.

The core idea revolves around manipulating the system call table, a data structure within the kernel that maps system call numbers to their corresponding functions. By overwriting specific entries in this table with a pointer to a custom function, usually one that simply returns an error code (like -ENOSYS for "Function not implemented"), the process can effectively disable those system calls. Attempting to invoke a disabled system call will then result in the custom function being executed, preventing the actual kernel function from running.

Austin details the process of achieving this, which involves obtaining the address of the system call table, changing the memory protection of that region to allow writing, and then overwriting the desired entries. He emphasizes the platform-specific nature of this technique, as the location and structure of the system call table can vary across different kernel versions and distributions. The provided code examples are tailored for a specific system configuration and require adaptation for other environments.

The post highlights the potential benefits of this approach. By selectively disabling system calls that a process doesn't legitimately require, the attack surface can be significantly reduced. Even if a vulnerability exists within the process, exploiting it to perform unintended actions might be prevented if the necessary system calls for those actions are disabled. This provides a layer of defense that can complement other security measures.

However, Austin also acknowledges the limitations and potential drawbacks. Modifying kernel structures directly is inherently risky and can lead to system instability if done incorrectly. The technique is also dependent on the specifics of the kernel, making it brittle and prone to breaking across updates or different systems. Additionally, sophisticated attackers might find ways to circumvent these restrictions, for example, by restoring the original system call table entries.

The post concludes by suggesting this method as a potentially useful tool for enhancing security in specific scenarios where the risks are acceptable and the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. It encourages careful consideration and thorough testing before implementing this technique in a production environment.
Summary of Comments ( 6 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44047741

HN commenters discuss the blog post's method of disabling kernel functions by overwriting the system call table entries with int3 instructions. Several express concerns about the fragility and unsafety of this approach, particularly in multi-threaded environments and due to potential conflicts with security mitigations like SELinux. Some suggest alternatives like using LD_PRELOAD to intercept and redirect function calls or employing seccomp-bpf for finer-grained control. Others question the practical use cases for this technique, acknowledging its potential for debugging or specialized security applications but cautioning against its general use. A few commenters share anecdotal experiences or related techniques, like disabling ptrace to hinder debuggers. The overall sentiment is one of cautious curiosity mixed with skepticism regarding the robustness and practicality of the described method.

The Hacker News post discussing Chad Austin's article on disabling kernel functions has a moderate number of comments, mostly focusing on the practicality and security implications of the technique described.

Several commenters express skepticism about the usefulness of this approach in real-world scenarios. One commenter highlights the limited scope of the technique, pointing out that it only affects the calling process and not the entire system. They argue that if a serious security vulnerability exists that requires disabling a kernel function, a system-wide solution would be necessary. Another commenter questions the practicality of preemptively disabling functions, suggesting it's difficult to predict which functions might be exploited in the future. They propose that a more reactive approach, focusing on patching vulnerabilities as they are discovered, is likely more effective.

Some comments discuss the potential security risks associated with disabling kernel functions. One commenter notes that disabling certain critical functions could destabilize the system, leading to crashes or unexpected behavior. Another expresses concern that attackers could potentially exploit this mechanism itself, disabling essential security functions to gain further access to the system.

A few commenters delve into the technical details of the implementation. One discusses the challenges of determining which functions are safe to disable without causing system instability. Another mentions the possibility of using this technique for performance optimization, by disabling unused or unnecessary kernel functions. However, they acknowledge that the potential performance gains are likely to be minimal.

One commenter provides an alternative perspective, suggesting that the technique could be valuable in highly specialized environments, such as embedded systems or security-critical applications. They argue that in these contexts, the limited scope and potential risks might be acceptable trade-offs for the added security benefits.

There's a thread discussing the difference between disabling a function and simply not calling it. Commenters clarify that disabling prevents the function from being called by any process, including libraries or other system components, while simply not calling it in your own code only affects your process's behavior.

Finally, some commenters express appreciation for the ingenuity of the approach, even if they acknowledge its limited practical application. They see it as an interesting exploration of the Linux kernel's capabilities and a potential starting point for further research in system security.
The Windows Subsystem for Linux is now open source

permalink

Posted: 2025-05-19 16:14:15

Microsoft has open-sourced core components of the Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL), specifically the kernel, drivers, and utilities that make up the user-mode based architecture of WSL itself. This includes the Linux kernel specifically built for WSL, as well as components like the wsl.exe command-line tool. The source code is available under the GPLv2 license on GitHub, allowing community contributions and increased transparency. While this move opens up WSL development, the underlying virtualization technology and Windows integration remain closed-source. This open-sourcing aims to foster collaboration with the Linux community and improve WSL's functionality.

In a momentous announcement on May 19, 2025, Microsoft declared the Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) open source, marking a significant shift in its strategy and embracing community collaboration for this popular developer tool. This decision, detailed in a blog post on the Windows Developer Blog, promises to foster greater transparency, accelerate development, and enhance the overall WSL experience for users. The post emphasizes that opening the source code of WSL will allow developers worldwide to contribute to its evolution, inspect its inner workings, suggest improvements, and even tailor it to their specific needs. Previously a closed-source component tightly integrated into the Windows operating system, WSL now invites community participation in shaping its future trajectory.

The blog post details the rationale behind this open-sourcing, highlighting Microsoft's commitment to empowering developers and recognizing the value of open-source collaboration. It underscores the growing popularity and importance of WSL as a critical tool for developers working across platforms, enabling them to leverage Linux tools and environments directly within Windows. By making the codebase publicly accessible, Microsoft aims to accelerate the pace of innovation for WSL, addressing community feedback more efficiently, and ultimately providing a richer, more robust Linux experience within the Windows ecosystem. The move also allows for greater scrutiny of the code, potentially leading to improvements in security, performance, and compatibility.

While the exact details of the open-sourcing process, including the chosen license and the specific components being released, are not extensively elaborated upon within the announcement, the blog post emphasizes Microsoft's intention to share more information in the near future. This suggests a phased approach to open-sourcing WSL, possibly with certain core components being released initially, followed by a gradual expansion to encompass more functionalities. The post conveys a clear message of enthusiasm for the future of WSL as an open-source project and anticipates a vibrant community actively participating in its development, benefiting both individual users and the broader developer community. This open-source initiative signifies a deepening commitment from Microsoft to the open-source philosophy, further solidifying its growing embrace of community-driven development and signaling a potentially transformative evolution for the Windows Subsystem for Linux.
Summary of Comments ( 991 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44031385

Hacker News commenters generally expressed cautious optimism about WSL being open-sourced. Some questioned the GPLv2 license choice, wondering about its implications for driver development and potential future monetization by Microsoft. Others pointed out the limitations of the current open-source release, noting that kernel modifications still require rebuilding from source and expressing a desire for a more streamlined process. Several commenters discussed the benefits of this move for interoperability and developer experience, while others speculated about Microsoft's motivations, suggesting it could be a strategic play to attract more developers to the Windows ecosystem or potentially influence future Linux development. A few expressed concern over the potential for increased complexity and maintenance burden.

The Hacker News post discussing the open-sourcing of WSL (Windows Subsystem for Linux) generated a significant number of comments, with many expressing cautious optimism, excitement, and some skepticism. Several recurring themes and compelling points emerged from the discussion.

Many commenters expressed interest in understanding the motivations behind Microsoft's decision to open-source WSL. Some speculated that it was a strategic move to attract more developers to the Windows ecosystem, leveraging the popularity and power of Linux tools. Others wondered if it was a way to reduce maintenance burden by involving the community, or perhaps a preemptive measure against potential future regulations targeting proprietary components within Windows.

A significant portion of the discussion revolved around the licensing choice (MIT license) and its implications. While generally viewed positively, some commenters raised questions about the practical implications of combining open-source WSL components with the closed-source Windows kernel. Concerns were also raised about the potential for future licensing changes or restrictions, and how this might impact the community's ability to contribute and modify the code.

Several technically-inclined commenters delved into the architecture of WSL and the challenges associated with open-sourcing a component so tightly integrated with the Windows kernel. Discussions touched upon topics like performance implications, driver development, and the potential for future improvements now that the community could contribute. Some commenters expressed hope that the open-sourcing would lead to better integration between Windows and Linux, potentially enabling features like direct hardware access within WSL.

There was notable excitement about the potential for community contributions, with commenters suggesting improvements such as better GPU support, enhanced filesystem integration, and improved compatibility with specific Linux distributions. Some even envisioned the possibility of porting WSL to other operating systems.

However, not all comments were positive. Some skepticism revolved around Microsoft's history with open source and concerns about potential "embrace, extend, extinguish" tactics. Others questioned the long-term viability of the project and the level of commitment Microsoft would maintain.

Finally, some commenters expressed a more general sentiment of surprise and appreciation for Microsoft's evolving approach to open source, contrasting the current open-source friendly approach with the company's historical stance. The open-sourcing of WSL was seen by some as a significant milestone in Microsoft's ongoing transformation and a positive development for the broader software development community.
The RISC OS GUI

permalink

Posted: 2025-05-18 13:14:35

The RISC OS GUI, developed by Acorn, prioritizes speed and efficiency through cooperative multitasking and a unique event handling model. Its distinctive drag-and-drop interface, involving iconic "icons" for applications, files, and even system settings, allows direct manipulation of objects and actions. Menus, invoked by clicking and holding on the desktop or objects, offer context-sensitive options, further streamlining interaction. While unconventional compared to prevalent windowing systems, RISC OS emphasizes minimal overhead and direct user control, leading to a responsive and arguably intuitive experience.

The article "The RISC OS GUI" offers a comprehensive exploration of the graphical user interface found on RISC OS, a British operating system known for its unique design and performance. The author begins by establishing the historical context of RISC OS, emerging from the Acorn Archimedes line of computers and inheriting design philosophies that prioritize speed and efficiency. This heritage directly influences the GUI's distinctive characteristics.

The author meticulously details the core components of the RISC OS GUI. The "WIMP" (Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointer) paradigm is present, but implemented with an unconventional approach. Instead of overlapping windows prevalent in other systems, RISC OS utilizes a tiling window manager where windows are arranged to avoid overlap, often filling the screen in a cascaded fashion. This contributes to the system's speed by simplifying window management and redrawing.

The article emphasizes the three-button mouse interaction integral to RISC OS. Each button plays a distinct role: select, menu, and adjust. This three-button system enables direct manipulation of objects and access to contextual menus, streamlining many tasks. The author highlights how this paradigm, coupled with the "icon bar" at the top of the screen, creates a consistent and efficient workflow.

A key aspect explored is the concept of "applications" within RISC OS. Rather than distinct, self-contained programs, applications in RISC OS often function as modular components that can interact and share data seamlessly. This is facilitated by the operating system's file system and memory management, enabling dynamic linking and inter-application communication. The article elucidates how this approach contributes to a more integrated and flexible user experience.

The integration of the filing system within the GUI is another prominent feature discussed. Files are represented visually as icons and can be directly manipulated using the three-button mouse. Dragging files between icons performs actions such as copying, opening, or printing, depending on the target icon. This direct manipulation of files simplifies file management tasks.

The author further explains the role of the "icon bar" as a central element of the GUI. Located at the top of the screen, the icon bar provides access to applications, files, and system settings. It acts as a persistent launcher and status area. Its functionality extends beyond simple program launching, allowing users to configure and customize the system environment.

Furthermore, the article delves into the specific rendering techniques used by RISC OS. It highlights the use of cooperative multitasking and explains how this impacts the responsiveness of the GUI. The author also notes the emphasis on simplicity and speed in the rendering process, contributing to the overall performance of the system.

Finally, the piece concludes by summarizing the key features of the RISC OS GUI and offering some perspectives on its advantages and disadvantages. The author acknowledges its unconventional approach but emphasizes the efficiency and speed that result from its unique design choices. The piece provides a detailed and thorough understanding of the RISC OS GUI and its underlying principles.
Summary of Comments ( 2 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44021191

Several commenters on Hacker News praised RISC OS's GUI for its speed, simplicity, and innovative features like the icon bar and context menus. Some noted its influence on other operating systems, particularly in the mobile space. Others discussed its unique cooperative multitasking model and its drawbacks compared to preemptive multitasking. A few users shared personal anecdotes about using RISC OS, highlighting its appeal to hobbyists and its dedicated community. Some lamented the lack of wider adoption and speculated about its potential had it been open-sourced earlier. The discussion also touched upon the challenges of porting it to modern hardware and the limitations of its single-user design.

The Hacker News post titled "The RISC OS GUI" has generated a moderate number of comments, mostly revolving around the unique design choices of RISC OS, its performance, and comparisons to other operating systems.

Several commenters discuss the distinctive "click and drag" interface for selecting text and other elements, contrasting it with the more common double-click approach. Some appreciate its efficiency once mastered, while others find it counterintuitive. One commenter elaborates on how this mechanism extends to window management, where dragging a window's title bar moves it, and dragging its edges resizes it, all without dedicated buttons. This unconventional approach sparks debate on its usability and learnability.

The performance of RISC OS is another prominent topic. Commenters highlight its speed and responsiveness, often attributed to its tight integration with the underlying ARM hardware and efficient coding. One commenter fondly recalls its impressive performance even on older, less powerful hardware. Another speculates that the design choices, such as the cooperative multitasking model, contribute to its perceived snappiness.

Comparisons to other operating systems are also frequent. Some commenters liken RISC OS's philosophy to that of earlier versions of MacOS, pre-OSX, with its focus on simplicity and direct manipulation. Others mention BeOS as another example of an innovative operating system with unique GUI paradigms. The discussion also touches on how RISC OS deviates from the dominant Windows/MacOS/Linux desktop environments, prompting reflections on alternative design philosophies.

A few comments delve into the technical underpinnings of RISC OS. One commenter notes the absence of memory protection in older versions, which contributed to its speed but also made it less robust. Another explains the cooperative multitasking model, where applications voluntarily relinquish control to the system, contrasting it with the preemptive multitasking found in most modern operating systems.

There's also a discussion on the accessibility of RISC OS today, with some commenters providing links to emulators and resources for those interested in trying it out. A recurring theme is the nostalgic appreciation for RISC OS among those who used it in the past, often accompanied by lamentations about its decline in popularity.

While no single comment dominates the discussion, the collective conversation paints a picture of RISC OS as a unique and intriguing operating system, praised for its speed and unconventional interface, while acknowledged for its limitations and departure from mainstream design. The comments offer a blend of technical insights, personal anecdotes, and comparative analyses, providing a multi-faceted perspective on this less-known operating system.
We can no longer run Microsoft Store on 1809/LTSC 2019

permalink

Posted: 2025-05-13 12:49:54

Microsoft Store no longer functions on Windows 10 version 1809 and Windows Server LTSC 2019. The underlying cause is the retirement of the Package Manager API and the transition to the Package Manager Client API, which is unavailable on these older operating systems. Attempts to use the Store result in errors or an empty interface. Users on these legacy systems are effectively locked out of acquiring and updating Store apps.

The GitHub repository titled "microsoft-store" by user "fernvenue" documents the growing difficulty and eventual impossibility of running the Microsoft Store application on Windows 10 version 1809 and Windows Server 2019 LTSC. These operating systems, particularly the Long-Term Servicing Channel (LTSC) release of 2019, are designed for stability and receive only security updates, foregoing feature updates that are common in other Windows 10 editions. The repository's README details how the Microsoft Store application has become increasingly reliant on newer dependencies and framework versions present in later Windows 10 releases. As a result, attempting to install or use the Store app on these older systems leads to errors and malfunctions. The author explains that even troubleshooting methods like manually installing dependencies or modifying system files are no longer effective in circumventing these compatibility issues. The core problem is the divergence between the evolving requirements of the Microsoft Store application and the static nature of the 1809 and LTSC 2019 environments. Therefore, the conclusion is that the Microsoft Store is effectively unsupported and no longer functional on these specific older versions of Windows. The implication is that users wishing to access the Microsoft Store and its applications must upgrade to a more recent, supported Windows 10 or Windows 11 release. The repository serves as a documentation of this incompatibility and a resource for users encountering this issue.
Summary of Comments ( 34 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43972360

Hacker News users discuss the implications of Microsoft Store no longer functioning on Windows 10 LTSC 2019 (1809). Several express frustration with Microsoft's push to newer operating systems, viewing it as a tactic to force upgrades and shorten the lifespan of supported versions. Some lament the loss of convenient access to applications like Notepad++, while others point out the continued viability of sideloading or using older Store versions like 11809.1001.12.0 as workarounds. The increasing difficulty of maintaining older Windows versions due to Microsoft's policies is a recurring theme. One user suggests that this move may be related to security concerns and dependencies on newer OS components within the Store application itself.

The Hacker News post "We can no longer run Microsoft Store on 1809/LTSC 2019" has generated several comments discussing the implications of Microsoft's decision to discontinue Store support for older Windows versions.

Several commenters express frustration and disappointment with Microsoft's move. They argue that Long-Term Servicing Channel (LTSC) releases are specifically chosen for their stability and extended support periods, and this change disrupts that expectation. Some feel that Microsoft is deliberately pushing users towards newer operating systems, even when those updates might introduce unwanted features or instability. The sentiment that Microsoft prioritizes its own interests over user needs is a recurring theme.

A few users highlight the impact on specific use cases, such as enterprise environments where upgrading operating systems is a complex and costly process. They explain how this change forces them to either undertake difficult upgrades or lose access to crucial applications distributed through the Microsoft Store.

The technical aspects of the change are also discussed. Some commenters speculate about the underlying reasons for Microsoft's decision, suggesting it might be related to security updates or dependencies on newer system components. Others offer potential workarounds, although they acknowledge these might not be feasible for everyone. One commenter mentions using third-party package managers as an alternative to the Microsoft Store, but this solution has limitations.

There's a discussion about the overall direction of Microsoft's software strategy. Some commenters express concern about the increasing prevalence of subscription-based services and the perceived decline in user control over their software. This ties into the larger conversation about "software as a service" and its potential drawbacks.

Finally, there's a thread about the challenges of maintaining legacy systems. Users discuss the trade-offs between stability and access to newer features, and the difficulties of supporting older hardware and software in a rapidly evolving technological landscape.

In summary, the comments reflect a general sentiment of frustration with Microsoft's decision. Users express concerns about the disruption to LTSC releases, the implications for enterprise environments, and the broader trends in software development. While some technical solutions are proposed, the overarching theme is the challenge of balancing stability and innovation in a constantly changing technological world.
Armbian Updates: OMV support, boot improvents, Rockchip optimizations

permalink

Posted: 2025-05-12 07:51:42

Armbian has released significant updates focusing on improved NAS functionality, faster boot times, and optimized Rockchip support. Key improvements include OpenMediaVault (OMV) integration for easier NAS setup and management, streamlined boot processes using systemd-boot on more devices for quicker startup, and various performance and stability enhancements specifically for Rockchip-based boards. These updates enhance the user experience and broaden the appeal of Armbian for server and general-purpose applications on supported ARM devices.

Armbian, a project dedicated to providing optimized Debian and Ubuntu-based distributions for ARM devices, has announced a series of significant updates encompassing enhanced NAS functionality, improved boot processes, and performance optimizations specifically for Rockchip-based platforms. The most noteworthy addition is native support for OpenMediaVault (OMV), a popular open-source network-attached storage (NAS) solution. This integration streamlines the setup and management of NAS functionalities on Armbian-supported hardware, enabling users to easily transform their devices into robust file servers, media centers, and more, without requiring complex manual configurations. This simplifies the process for individuals looking to build a home or small office NAS using ARM-based single-board computers (SBCs).

Beyond OMV integration, Armbian has made considerable strides in refining its boot system. Improvements include enhanced support for various UEFI implementations, leading to more reliable and faster boot times across a broader range of devices. These improvements address inconsistencies and complexities often encountered when booting from different UEFI firmwares, ultimately providing a smoother and more predictable startup experience. Further enhancements address issues with U-Boot, a widely used bootloader in embedded systems, specifically resolving problems related to USB detection and operation during early boot stages. This is crucial for users relying on bootable USB drives or requiring USB functionality immediately upon startup.

Furthermore, Armbian's latest update introduces specific optimizations targeted at Rockchip SoCs, a prevalent processor architecture in many ARM-based devices. These optimizations focus on improving the overall system performance and responsiveness of devices powered by Rockchip processors, capitalizing on the hardware's capabilities. This includes optimized kernel configurations and driver implementations specifically tailored for Rockchip platforms, resulting in a more efficient and performant system overall. The developers have also incorporated improvements to the desktop environment experience on Rockchip devices, resulting in smoother graphical performance and enhanced user interaction.

In summary, the latest Armbian updates represent a significant step forward in providing a robust and versatile operating system for ARM devices. The introduction of OMV support opens up new possibilities for NAS deployments, while the boot system improvements and Rockchip optimizations enhance the reliability, performance, and overall user experience. These updates reinforce Armbian's commitment to delivering a highly optimized and user-friendly platform for a diverse range of ARM hardware.
- Armbian
- Linux
- Embedded Systems
- Arm
- Single Board Computer
- SBC
- Operating System
- OpenMediaVault
- OMV
- NAS
- Network Attached Storage
- Bootloader
- performance
- optimization
- Rockchip
- Kernel
Summary of Comments ( 14 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43960577

HN users generally praise Armbian's progress, particularly its improved support for NAS use-cases through OpenMediaVault (OMV) integration. Some commenters highlight specific advantages like the lightweight nature of Armbian compared to other ARM OSes, and its suitability for older hardware. Others express interest in trying Armbian on devices like the RockPro64 or discuss the benefits of specific kernel versions and board compatibility. A few users also share their positive experiences with Armbian for server and homelab applications, emphasizing its stability and performance. One commenter mentions the utility of Armbian for deploying ad blockers on home networks.

The Hacker News post titled "Armbian Updates: OMV support, boot improvents, Rockchip optimizations" linking to an Armbian newsflash has generated a modest discussion with a few key points raised.

One commenter expresses excitement about the mentioned improvements to the Banana Pi BPI-R2 Pro, specifically highlighting the desire for mainline kernel support for the device. They appear to be a user of this specific board and are looking forward to the benefits a mainline kernel could bring.

Another commenter raises a concern about the focus on NAS (Network Attached Storage) use-cases for these single-board computers. They argue that the limited SATA connectivity on many of these boards restricts their true NAS potential and suggests that other applications might be more suitable. They also mention concerns about power consumption and reliability compared to purpose-built NAS solutions.

A further comment discusses the complexities and challenges involved in supporting various ARM-based boards, acknowledging Armbian's efforts in navigating this complex landscape. They suggest that focusing on fewer, more popular boards might be a more sustainable approach. This comment also touches upon the Rockchip optimizations mentioned in the title and expresses interest in seeing those improvements.

Finally, a user chimes in sharing their positive experience with Armbian, highlighting its reliability and performance on a RockPro64 board used as a home server. They specifically praise the ease of installation and the comprehensive documentation provided by the Armbian project.

The overall sentiment in the comments is generally positive towards Armbian and its efforts to improve ARM-based SBC support. However, there's also a thread of pragmatic concern regarding the suitability of some of these devices for specific applications like NAS, and the inherent challenges in maintaining such a broad range of hardware support.
Huawei unveils laptop running self-developed HarmonyOS as Windows licence expire

permalink

Posted: 2025-05-08 14:24:04

Huawei has launched its first laptop powered by its self-developed HarmonyOS operating system. This move comes as the company's license to use Microsoft Windows has reportedly expired. The new laptop, the Qingyun L410, is aimed at the government and enterprise market, signaling Huawei's continued push to establish its own ecosystem independent of US-originated software.

Shenzhen-based telecommunications giant Huawei Technologies has unveiled its latest offering in the personal computing market: the Qingyun L410 laptop. This significant development marks the first instance of a Huawei laptop eschewing the ubiquitous Microsoft Windows operating system in favor of the company's indigenously developed HarmonyOS. This strategic shift comes in the wake of the expiration of Huawei's license to utilize Windows, a consequence of the ongoing trade restrictions imposed by the United States government. These restrictions, implemented in 2019, stem from concerns regarding national security and accusations of Huawei's potential ties to the Chinese government, allegations that Huawei vehemently denies.

The Qingyun L410, specifically designed for enterprise clients in the Chinese government and state-owned enterprises, signals Huawei's determined pursuit of self-sufficiency in its technological endeavors. The laptop is powered by a Kunpeng 990 processor, another product of Huawei's in-house development, further solidifying the company's commitment to reducing reliance on foreign technology. This unveiling represents a pivotal moment in Huawei's broader strategy to navigate the challenges presented by the US trade restrictions and establish a robust ecosystem around its proprietary HarmonyOS. While initial deployment targets a specific niche market, the introduction of the Qingyun L410 could potentially pave the way for wider adoption of HarmonyOS-powered laptops in the future, further challenging the dominance of Windows in the PC operating system landscape, particularly within China. The development also underscores the growing technological decoupling between the US and China, with both nations increasingly prioritizing self-reliance in critical technology sectors.
Summary of Comments ( 5 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43926350

Hacker News users discuss Huawei's HarmonyOS laptop, expressing skepticism about its viability as a Windows replacement. Several commenters doubt HarmonyOS's compatibility with existing software and question its overall performance. Some suggest the move is forced due to US sanctions, while others speculate about its potential success in the Chinese market. A few users raise concerns about potential security vulnerabilities and backdoors given the Chinese government's influence over Huawei. Overall, the sentiment leans towards cautious pessimism about HarmonyOS's ability to compete with established operating systems outside of China.

The Hacker News comments section for the article "Huawei unveils laptop running self-developed HarmonyOS as Windows licence expires" contains a robust discussion revolving around the viability and implications of Huawei's new HarmonyOS laptop.

Several commenters express skepticism about HarmonyOS's true nature. Some question whether it's genuinely a new operating system or just a reskinned version of Android. This skepticism stems from observations about the similarities between HarmonyOS and Android in terms of app compatibility and underlying architecture. Some users recount their experiences with HarmonyOS, noting the presence of Android app support and even the appearance of Android debugging tools, fueling the suspicion that it's not entirely distinct from Android.

A recurring theme in the comments is the challenge Huawei faces in building a thriving software ecosystem. Commenters point to the importance of developer support and a robust app store for an operating system to succeed. They question whether Huawei can attract enough developers to create applications specifically for HarmonyOS, especially given the existing dominance of Android and iOS. The lack of Google Mobile Services (GMS) is also highlighted as a significant hurdle for international adoption.

Several comments touch upon the geopolitical context surrounding Huawei's move. Some speculate that the development of HarmonyOS is a direct consequence of the US sanctions and the expiration of Huawei's Windows license, forcing the company to pursue self-reliance. Others discuss the implications for the broader tech landscape, with some suggesting that a successful HarmonyOS could challenge the dominance of American tech giants.

Some commenters delve into the technical aspects of HarmonyOS, discussing its microkernel architecture and potential advantages in terms of performance and security. Others express curiosity about its compatibility with different hardware platforms and its potential for use in Internet of Things (IoT) devices.

A few commenters offer more positive perspectives, expressing interest in trying out HarmonyOS and hoping for its success. They acknowledge the challenges Huawei faces but also recognize the potential for innovation and competition in the operating system market.

Overall, the comments section reveals a mixed sentiment towards Huawei's HarmonyOS. While some express excitement and cautious optimism, many remain skeptical about its long-term viability and question whether it can truly compete with established players like Android and Windows. The discussion highlights the significant challenges Huawei faces in building a thriving software ecosystem and overcoming geopolitical hurdles.
Lilith and Modula-2

permalink

Posted: 2025-05-04 12:10:03

The blog post recounts the author's experience using Lilith, a workstation specifically designed for the Modula-2 programming language in the 1980s. Fascinated by Niklaus Wirth's work, the author acquired a Lilith and found it to be a powerful and elegant machine, deeply integrated with Modula-2. The post highlights the impressive speed of the system, the innovative windowing system, and the seamless integration of the Modula-2 development environment. Despite its advantages, the Lilith's specialized nature and limited software library ultimately led to its decline, making it a fascinating footnote in computing history.

The blog post "Lilith and Modula-2," authored by Paul Robinson, delves into the historical relationship between the Lilith workstation, a pioneering personal computer developed at ETH Zürich in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and the Modula-2 programming language, Niklaus Wirth's successor to Pascal. Robinson begins by contextualizing the era, highlighting the limitations of then-contemporary minicomputers and the nascent stages of personal computing. He emphasizes the pivotal role of Niklaus Wirth in both projects, with Wirth seeking a more powerful and efficient platform to develop and showcase Modula-2. This led directly to the conception and development of the Lilith.

The post proceeds to detail the hardware specifications of the Lilith, noting its innovative design features for the time. This includes the use of a bit-sliced processor, a high-resolution bitmapped display, a mouse, and a unique operating system tailored for the Modula-2 environment. Robinson specifically mentions the custom-designed processor, crafted to efficiently execute the Modula-2 instruction set, resulting in impressive performance for the era. The integrated nature of the hardware and software, with the operating system itself written in Modula-2, is highlighted as a key strength of the Lilith system. This tight integration allowed for a streamlined and efficient development environment.

The article also explores the software ecosystem of the Lilith, predominantly revolving around Modula-2. It explains how Modula-2’s modular structure, improved type safety, and support for concurrent programming made it a suitable language for developing complex systems. The post mentions various software tools available on the Lilith, including a sophisticated text editor, a debugger, and other utilities, all implemented in Modula-2, further reinforcing the language’s central role in the Lilith ecosystem.

Robinson emphasizes the significant influence of the Lilith and Modula-2 on subsequent personal computer development. While the Lilith itself wasn't a commercial success due to its high cost, its innovative design and software environment served as inspiration for later systems. The post concludes by observing the lasting impact of Wirth's design philosophy, particularly his emphasis on simplicity, efficiency, and the symbiotic relationship between hardware and software, exemplified by the Lilith and Modula-2 project. The author reflects on the Lilith's place as a historically significant stepping stone in the evolution of personal computing, demonstrating the practical application of Wirth’s innovative ideas regarding language design and system architecture.
Summary of Comments ( 0 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43886271

HN commenters discuss Modula-2's strengths, primarily its clarity and strong typing, which fostered maintainable code. Some fondly recall using it for various projects, including operating systems and embedded systems, praising its performance and modularity. Others compare it to Oberon and discuss Wirth's design philosophy. Several lament its lack of widespread adoption, attributing it to factors like Wirth's resistance to extensions and the rise of C++. The lack of garbage collection and the complexity of its module system are also mentioned as potential downsides. Several commenters mention Wirth's preference for simpler systems and his perceived disdain for object-oriented programming. Finally, there's some discussion of alternative historical paths and the influence Modula-2 had on later languages.

The Hacker News post "Lilith and Modula-2" has generated several comments discussing various aspects of the Lilith workstation, Modula-2, and their historical context.

Several commenters reminisce about their experiences with Modula-2, often comparing it favorably to Pascal and highlighting its strengths in systems programming and structured development. One commenter fondly recalls using Modula-2 on the Lilith and praises its elegance and the tight integration of the language and the hardware. They also mention the Ceres workstation, a successor to Lilith.

Another commenter notes Wirth's perspective on hardware design and how it influenced the Lilith's development. They point out the importance of Wirth's belief that hardware should be designed with the programming language in mind, leading to a more harmonious system. This philosophy is contrasted with the more common practice of designing hardware first and then adapting the software.

The discussion also touches upon the reasons for Modula-2's relative obscurity despite its technical merits. Some suggest that the lack of available compilers and libraries, combined with the rise of C, hindered its widespread adoption. Others speculate that external factors, such as marketing and corporate backing, also played a role.

One commenter provides a link to a scanned document detailing the Lilith's architecture and software, offering a valuable resource for those interested in learning more about the system. Another commenter draws parallels between Modula-2 and Oberon, highlighting Wirth's continued refinement of his language design principles. They mention Oberon's use on the Ceres and its focus on simplicity and clarity.

Several commenters express admiration for Niklaus Wirth and his contributions to computer science. His focus on simplicity, elegance, and the close relationship between hardware and software is a recurring theme throughout the comments.

There's also a brief discussion about the availability of emulators for the Lilith, allowing modern users to experience this historical system. This leads to a mention of the Oberon RISC Emulator, allowing experimentation with Oberon System 3.

Finally, one commenter provides a personal anecdote about meeting Niklaus Wirth and being impressed by his humility and dedication. This story reinforces the image of Wirth as a significant figure in computer science who prioritized elegant and practical solutions.
Oberon Pi

permalink

Posted: 2025-05-04 08:54:44

Niklaus Wirth developed Oberon Pi, a single-board computer and operating system combination, as a modern embodiment of his minimalist computing philosophy. The system, built around a Broadcom BCM2835 SoC (the same as the original Raspberry Pi), features a compact, self-hosting Oberon compiler and operating system written entirely in Oberon. Wirth prioritized simplicity and efficiency, creating a system capable of booting and compiling its own OS and core tools in mere seconds, showcasing the power of a streamlined, tightly integrated software and hardware design. This project exemplifies Wirth's ongoing pursuit of elegant and efficient computing solutions.

This blog post, titled "Oberon Pi," details an implementation of the Oberon programming language and operating system on the Raspberry Pi single-board computer, a project undertaken by Niklaus Wirth, the creator of Oberon. The author meticulously describes the process of porting the system, highlighting the challenges and solutions encountered along the way. Wirth's primary motivation, as explained in the post, stemmed from a desire to experience the performance of his creation on more modern, readily available hardware. The Raspberry Pi, with its ARM processor and compact design, presented an ideal platform for this endeavor.

The porting process itself involved adapting the existing Oberon system, originally designed for different architectures, to the specifics of the Raspberry Pi's ARM processor. This entailed modifying the boot loader, adjusting memory management routines, and ensuring compatibility with the Pi's peripherals. The post emphasizes Wirth's commitment to maintaining the core principles of Oberon, namely simplicity, efficiency, and elegance, throughout the adaptation. He specifically mentions streamlining the graphics drivers and optimizing performance for the ARM architecture, resulting in a surprisingly responsive system given the relatively modest hardware capabilities of the Raspberry Pi at the time.

The post also touches upon the practical aspects of the project, such as using a pre-existing SD card image preparation tool for ease of deployment and utilizing a USB keyboard and mouse for interaction. Furthermore, the author highlights the successful execution of various Oberon applications, including a web browser and a text editor, demonstrating the full functionality of the ported system. This showcased not only the portability of Oberon but also its practicality as a complete operating system capable of running real-world applications on a resource-constrained device. The successful porting of Oberon to the Raspberry Pi, as documented in the post, serves as a testament to the system's enduring relevance and efficient design philosophy. It also underlines the enduring passion of its creator, Niklaus Wirth, for refining and exploring the capabilities of his creation on contemporary hardware platforms.
Summary of Comments ( 14 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43885478

HN commenters generally praise Wirth's work on Oberon, admiring its simplicity, elegance, and efficiency. Several discuss their experiences using Oberon or similar systems, highlighting its performance and small footprint. Some express a desire for a modern, actively maintained version of the OS and language, while others reminisce about the system's impact on their own programming practices. A few comments touch on the RISC-V architecture and its suitability for running Oberon. The tight integration of hardware and software in the Oberon project is also a recurring point of interest. Some express skepticism about its practicality in the modern computing landscape, while others see its minimalist approach as a valuable counterpoint to current trends.

The Hacker News post titled "Oberon Pi" has generated a modest discussion with several interesting comments. Many of the comments revolve around the unique aspects of the Oberon System and its suitability for the Raspberry Pi.

One commenter expresses enthusiasm for the Oberon System on the Raspberry Pi, highlighting the responsiveness of the system, particularly the speed of window redraws. They suggest this performance is a result of the tight integration between the Oberon System and its hardware, contrasting it with the perceived bloat of more common desktop environments. This commenter also praises the small size of the Oberon system image, emphasizing its efficiency.

Another commenter touches on the historical significance of Niklaus Wirth and his contributions to computer science, including Pascal and Modula-2. They express interest in exploring Oberon and its unique approach to operating system design.

The topic of RISC-V is also raised, with a commenter asking about the possibility of porting the Oberon System to this architecture. This prompts a reply indicating that such a port is theoretically feasible, given the existence of RISC-V ports for other operating systems, but it would require a significant development effort. They highlight that the current implementation of Oberon is deeply intertwined with the ARM architecture of the Raspberry Pi.

A separate thread discusses the perceived steep learning curve associated with the Oberon System. A commenter mentions the challenges they faced adapting to the Oberon keyboard layout and its reliance on the mouse for text manipulation. This comment prompts a discussion about the philosophy behind Oberon's design choices, with some defending its unique approach and others acknowledging its potential drawbacks for users accustomed to more conventional operating systems.

Finally, there's a brief exchange about licensing and availability. One commenter mentions seeking clarification regarding the system's license and whether it is open-source. This leads to a reply pointing to resources where more information about Oberon's licensing can be found.

Overall, the comments reflect a mixture of appreciation for the Oberon System's minimalist design and performance, curiosity about its historical context, and pragmatic concerns about its learning curve and suitability for everyday use.
Why some Mac apps launch slowly: A follow-up

permalink

Posted: 2025-05-01 15:25:36

This blog post delves deeper into the slow launch times of some Mac applications, particularly those built with Electron. It revisits and expands upon a previous investigation, pinpointing macOS's handling of code signatures as a significant bottleneck. Specifically, the codesign utility, used to verify the integrity of app binaries, appears to be inefficient when dealing with large numbers of embedded frameworks, a common characteristic of Electron apps. While the developer has reported this issue to Apple, the post offers potential workarounds, like restructuring apps to have fewer embedded frameworks or leveraging notarization. Ultimately, the author emphasizes the significant performance impact this issue can have and encourages other developers experiencing similar problems to report them to Apple.

This blog post, a follow-up to a previous exploration of slow application launch times on macOS, delves deeper into the intricacies of application startup and the reasons behind perceived sluggishness. The author, drawing from continued investigation and reader feedback, refines their initial understanding and offers a more nuanced perspective on the factors at play.

The primary focus of this follow-up is the impact of dynamic linker (dyld) shared cache invalidation. The author elucidates that modifications to system libraries, frequently introduced through software updates, necessitate the rebuilding of this cache. This rebuilding process, occurring in the background during the initial launches of applications after an update, can introduce noticeable delays. The author emphasizes that this slowdown is not inherent to the applications themselves, but rather a consequence of the system's need to reconcile changes in its foundational components.

The post clarifies that the previously observed slowdowns were not solely attributable to the dyld cache rebuild. Instead, the author identifies the interaction between the cache rebuild and the Transparency, Consent, and Control (TCC) framework as a significant contributor to the prolonged launch times. TCC, responsible for managing user permissions for sensitive operations like accessing files or the camera, performs checks during application startup. When coupled with a dyld cache rebuild, these TCC checks can compound the delay, creating a more perceptible performance impact.

The article explains that while TCC's verification process is essential for system security, its execution during a dyld cache rebuild exacerbates the slowdown. The author speculates that this might be due to TCC needing to re-establish its internal state or re-verify permissions against the newly rebuilt cache. This confluence of factors creates a scenario where applications appear to launch significantly slower than usual.

The post concludes by reiterating that these launch delays are typically transient, resolving once the dyld cache rebuild and TCC reconciliation are complete. It reinforces the idea that the slowdown is not a flaw in individual applications, but rather a byproduct of necessary system maintenance occurring in the background. Furthermore, it highlights the complexities of system-level operations and their subtle yet potentially significant impact on application performance. The author encourages patience during these periods of system adjustment, assuring users that normal launch speeds should return once the background processes are finalized.
Summary of Comments ( 1 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43858970

The Hacker News comments discuss the linked article about slow Mac app launches, focusing on the impact of poorly optimized or excessive use of frameworks and plugins. Several commenters agree with the author's points, sharing their own experiences with sluggish applications and pointing fingers at Electron apps in particular. Some discuss the tradeoffs developers face between speed and cross-platform compatibility. The overhead of loading numerous dynamic libraries and frameworks is highlighted as a key culprit, with one commenter suggesting a tool to visualize the dependency tree could be beneficial. Others mention Apple's role in this issue, citing the increasing complexity of macOS and the lack of clear developer guidelines for optimization. A few comments dispute the article's claims, arguing that modern hardware should be capable of handling these loads and suggesting other potential bottlenecks like storage speed or network issues.

The Hacker News post "Why some Mac apps launch slowly: A follow-up" has generated a number of comments discussing the original article's findings and offering additional perspectives on macOS application launch performance.

Several commenters discuss their own experiences with slow-launching applications, corroborating the article's claims. One commenter highlights the frustration of waiting for apps like Slack and Docker to start, pointing out the perceived discrepancy between the speed of modern hardware and the sluggishness of some applications. Another commenter mentions slow launch times with Adobe apps, echoing a common complaint about the performance of these applications on macOS.

Some users delve into more technical aspects. One comment explores the complexity of application startup, mentioning the numerous frameworks, libraries, and plugins that need to be loaded. This commenter suggests that the intricate interplay of these components contributes significantly to launch times. Another technical comment touches on the impact of notarization, a security measure introduced by Apple, and how it might introduce overhead during the startup process. However, this is countered by another user who argues that notarization is unlikely to be the primary culprit.

The discussion also turns to potential solutions and mitigation strategies. One commenter suggests using native macOS APIs whenever possible, arguing that this can improve performance compared to cross-platform frameworks like Electron. Another user proposes using a tool to analyze startup times and identify bottlenecks.

Several commenters express their appreciation for the original article, thanking the author for shedding light on a persistent issue. They praise the in-depth analysis and the clear explanations provided.

A recurring theme in the comments is the desire for Apple to address these performance issues. Some users suggest that Apple could provide better tools for developers to optimize their applications or improve the underlying macOS framework to enhance overall launch speed. One commenter even expresses skepticism about Apple's willingness to tackle the problem, suggesting that the company might prioritize other aspects of the operating system.

Finally, a few comments offer alternative explanations for slow launch times, such as network dependencies or the presence of antivirus software. One commenter also points out the role of hard drive speed, noting that using an SSD can drastically improve launch times compared to a traditional hard drive.
Office is too slow, so Microsoft is making it load at Windows startup

permalink

Posted: 2025-05-01 00:06:00

To speed up perceived Office app launch times, Microsoft is implementing a change where core parts of the suite will load in the background during Windows startup. This pre-loading aims to make opening Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Outlook feel significantly faster, addressing user complaints about sluggishness. The feature, currently rolling out to Microsoft 365 subscribers, can be disabled in settings if desired.

In an effort to address pervasive complaints regarding the sluggish startup performance of its ubiquitous Office suite, Microsoft is implementing a novel approach: pre-loading core components of Office applications during the Windows boot sequence. This proactive measure, aimed at significantly reducing the perceived latency users experience when launching Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Outlook, represents a substantial shift in how Microsoft manages its software's interaction with the operating system.

Traditionally, Office applications, like most other programs, have loaded on demand—only when the user explicitly initiates their execution. However, this conventional method contributes to the delay users encounter before they can begin working with their documents, spreadsheets, or email. By pre-initializing essential elements of the Office suite in the background during the Windows startup process, Microsoft aims to streamline the subsequent loading of these applications. This pre-loading strategy, analogous to pre-heating an oven before baking, prepares the necessary components in advance, thereby reducing the time required for the applications to become fully operational and responsive when summoned by the user.

This change, currently being deployed to users enrolled in the Microsoft 365 Insider program's Beta Channel, will likely become a standard feature for all Microsoft 365 subscribers in the near future. While the anticipated benefit is a marked improvement in application launch speed, the trade-off involves a potentially increased utilization of system resources during the Windows boot process and potentially a slightly longer boot time. The extent of this impact will depend on the specific hardware configuration of the user's machine. Microsoft anticipates that the performance gains in application startup will outweigh the relatively minor impact on boot times, resulting in an overall improved user experience, particularly for those who frequently utilize Office applications. The company is actively monitoring feedback from Insider program participants to fine-tune the implementation and ensure the optimal balance between system resource utilization and application responsiveness.
Summary of Comments ( 683 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43852162

Hacker News users largely criticized Microsoft's decision to pre-load Office applications at startup to improve perceived performance. Many argued this was a poor solution, consuming resources and potentially slowing boot times for a marginal speed improvement. Some suggested alternative approaches like optimizing the Office suite itself or allowing users to opt-in to pre-loading rather than forcing it on everyone. The sentiment was that this move prioritized superficial performance gains over actual system efficiency, echoing past criticisms of Microsoft's bloatware tendencies. A few commenters offered potential benefits, like faster access for frequent Office users, but this was overshadowed by the prevailing negative reaction.

The Hacker News post discussing Microsoft's decision to pre-load Office applications at Windows startup to improve perceived performance generated a range of commentary, largely critical of the approach.

Several commenters expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of this solution, arguing that it simply shifts the performance bottleneck from application launch to the startup process itself. They predicted slower boot times and increased resource consumption during startup, potentially impacting the overall user experience rather than improving it. Some also pointed out the irony of Microsoft resorting to pre-loading, a technique often associated with bloatware and unwanted startup programs, for their flagship productivity suite.

A recurring theme was the perceived decline in the quality and performance of Office over time. Commenters reminisced about earlier, leaner versions of the software and lamented the increasing bloat and complexity of recent iterations. They attributed this to feature creep, integration with cloud services, and a shift towards web technologies, speculating that these factors have contributed to the performance issues that Microsoft is now attempting to address with pre-loading.

Several users suggested alternative solutions, including optimizing the codebase, reducing dependencies, and adopting a more modular approach to software development. They also highlighted the potential benefits of native compilation over web-based technologies for performance-sensitive applications.

Some commenters also questioned Microsoft's motives, speculating that the move might be driven by metrics related to user engagement and time spent within the Office applications rather than genuine concern for performance. Pre-loading, they argued, could artificially inflate these metrics.

A few commenters offered a more nuanced perspective, acknowledging the challenges of optimizing complex software while also recognizing the need for improved performance. They suggested that pre-loading could be a reasonable compromise in certain scenarios, particularly for users who rely heavily on Office applications. However, even these commenters expressed reservations about the potential for negative side effects on system performance.

Overall, the sentiment in the comments section was predominantly negative, reflecting a general dissatisfaction with the performance of modern Office applications and skepticism towards Microsoft's chosen solution.
Why did Windows 7 log on slower for months if you had a solid color background?

permalink

Posted: 2025-04-28 23:27:11

A Windows 7 bug caused significantly slower login times for users with solid color desktop backgrounds, particularly shades of pure black. This issue stemmed from a change in how Windows handled color conversion for desktop composition, specifically affecting the way it handled the alpha channel of the solid color. The system would unnecessarily convert the color back and forth between different formats for every pixel on the screen, adding a significant computational overhead that only manifested when a solid color filled the entire desktop. This conversion wasn't necessary for photographic or patterned backgrounds, explaining why the slowdown wasn't universal.

This Microsoft blog post delves into a performance mystery that plagued Windows 7 users for an extended period: significantly slower logon times when employing a solid color desktop background. The investigation unfolds like a detective story, showcasing the complexities of software debugging within a large, interconnected system.

Initially, the issue manifested as reports of sluggish logon performance, specifically when users had configured a single, solid color as their desktop wallpaper. The investigation began with standard performance analysis tools, examining CPU usage, disk I/O, and network activity, but these revealed no obvious bottlenecks. This suggested the issue wasn't related to resource contention, but rather something more subtle.

A critical clue emerged from analyzing performance traces. These traces indicated excessive time spent within the winlogon.exe process, specifically during the wallpaper loading phase. Further investigation revealed that the problem wasn't with loading the solid color itself, but rather with how the Desktop Window Manager (DWM) handled it.

DWM, responsible for the visually rich aspects of the Windows 7 Aero interface, utilizes hardware acceleration for optimal performance. It employs a technique called "dirty region tracking" to minimize the amount of graphical data needing redrawing. When a window is moved or resized, only the affected portion of the screen, the "dirty region," is updated. This optimization significantly reduces the computational burden on the GPU.

The root cause lay in how DWM handled solid color backgrounds. Instead of treating the entire desktop as a single, unchanging surface, it incorrectly calculated numerous tiny dirty regions. This behavior, while logically sound for complex backgrounds, was highly inefficient for a uniform solid color. Consequently, DWM would repeatedly redraw these minuscule regions, needlessly consuming GPU cycles and delaying the logon process.

The fix, ultimately implemented in a later Windows 7 update, involved optimizing DWM to recognize solid color backgrounds as a special case. By treating the entire desktop as a single, static region, the unnecessary redrawing was eliminated. This resulted in dramatically improved logon times for users who preferred a minimalist aesthetic.

The blog post highlights the intricacies of software development and the unexpected performance implications seemingly minor design decisions can have. The seemingly trivial choice of a solid color background triggered a chain of events within DWM, ultimately impacting the user experience in a noticeable way. This case serves as a testament to the importance of rigorous testing and performance analysis in ensuring a smooth and responsive operating system.
Summary of Comments ( 181 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43827214

Hacker News commenters discussed potential reasons for the Windows 7 login slowdown with solid color backgrounds. Some suggested the issue stemmed from desktop composition (DWM) inefficiencies, specifically how it handled solid colors versus images, possibly related to memory management or caching. One commenter pointed out that using a solid color likely bypassed a code path optimization for images, leading to extra processing. Others speculated about the role of video driver interactions and the potential impact of different color depths. Some users shared anecdotal experiences, confirming the slowdown with solid colors and noting improved performance after switching to patterned backgrounds. The complexity of isolating the root cause within the DWM was also acknowledged.

The Hacker News post discussing the Microsoft blog post about Windows 7 login slowdowns with solid color backgrounds has a moderate number of comments, exploring various aspects of the issue and its implications.

Several commenters express a sense of amused disbelief at the root cause of the problem, highlighting the unexpected complexity and interconnectedness of software systems. The idea that a seemingly simple choice like a solid color background could impact login speed so significantly struck many as counterintuitive and humorous.

A few commenters delve into the technical details offered in the blog post, attempting to understand the specific mechanics of how the solid color background triggered the performance bottleneck. They discuss the interaction between the desktop window manager (DWM), color conversion processes, and the CPU load associated with these operations. Some question the efficiency of the original Windows 7 implementation, speculating on alternative approaches that might have avoided the problem.

Some commenters discuss the broader implications of this issue for software development and debugging. The difficulty of pinpointing the root cause is emphasized, with some noting the challenges of tracking down performance regressions in complex systems. The story serves as a reminder of the unforeseen consequences that can arise from seemingly innocuous changes.

The irony of a feature designed to improve visual appeal inadvertently degrading performance is also highlighted. This leads to a discussion about the trade-offs between aesthetics and functionality in software design.

A few comments touch on the user experience aspect, with some users sharing their own experiences with slow login times on Windows 7. They express a sense of validation at finally understanding the reason behind the issue.

Finally, some commenters express nostalgia for Windows 7, contrasting its perceived stability and performance with newer Windows versions. This sparks a brief discussion about the evolution of the Windows operating system and the ongoing debate surrounding its different iterations. There is no widespread consensus on which version is "best," with individual preferences and priorities influencing opinions.
ZFS: Apple's New Filesystem that wasn't (2016)

permalink

Posted: 2025-04-27 09:25:36

The blog post explores the history of Apple's rumored adoption of ZFS, the advanced file system. While Apple engineers internally prototyped and tested ZFS integration, ultimately licensing and legal complexities, combined with performance concerns specific to Apple's hardware (particularly flash storage) and the desire for full control over the file system's development, prevented its official adoption. Though ZFS offered appealing features, Apple chose to focus on its own in-house solutions, culminating in APFS. The post debunks claims of a fully functioning "ready to ship" ZFS implementation within OS X 10.5, clarifying it was experimental and never intended for release.

Adam Leventhal's blog post, "ZFS: Apple's New Filesystem that wasn't (2016)," delves into the historical flirtation between Apple and the ZFS filesystem, ultimately explaining why the promising union never materialized into a shipped product. Leventhal begins by setting the stage in the mid-2000s, a period when Apple was actively seeking a successor to their aging HFS+ filesystem. ZFS, with its advanced features like copy-on-write, snapshots, checksumming, and dynamic striping, appeared to be a compelling candidate. This potential was further amplified by Sun Microsystems, the creators of ZFS, open-sourcing the filesystem under the Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL). Apple even hired Don Brady, a key ZFS engineer, fueling speculation of imminent ZFS integration into macOS.

The blog post then highlights a pivotal moment: the WWDC 2006 "leopard sneak peek," where Apple showcased ZFS as a potential cornerstone of their upcoming operating system, Mac OS X Leopard. Screenshots displayed ZFS volumes seamlessly integrated within Disk Utility, bolstering the perception that ZFS adoption was all but certain. However, this initial enthusiasm eventually waned.

Leventhal then carefully dissects the reasons behind Apple's eventual abandonment of ZFS. He points to the licensing incompatibility between the CDDL and Apple's proprietary software ecosystem as a significant hurdle. Integrating a CDDL-licensed component into macOS could potentially create legal complexities and restrict Apple's ability to maintain tight control over their operating system's codebase. Furthermore, the blog post mentions Sun Microsystems' acquisition by Oracle in 2010, introducing further uncertainty into the future of ZFS and potentially complicating any pre-existing agreements between Apple and Sun.

The author also explores technical challenges that might have contributed to Apple's decision. While ZFS boasted impressive features, its performance characteristics may not have been ideally suited for Apple's hardware, particularly on systems with limited RAM. The memory intensity of ZFS, although beneficial for data integrity and performance in certain scenarios, could have posed a problem on lower-end Mac configurations.

Finally, Leventhal concludes that while ZFS integration into macOS seemed promising at one point, a combination of licensing conflicts, the Oracle acquisition of Sun, and potential performance considerations ultimately led Apple to pursue alternative filesystem solutions. He underscores the missed opportunity, acknowledging the potential benefits ZFS could have brought to macOS users, but ultimately recognizing the complex factors that influenced Apple's final decision. The post serves as a retrospective analysis of a significant "what-if" moment in Apple's history, illuminating the intricate interplay of technical capabilities, legal constraints, and business strategy that shape technological advancements.
- ZFS
- Apple
- Filesystem
- macOS
- Operating System
- History
- Technology
- Software
- Storage
- 2016
Summary of Comments ( 63 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43810566

HN commenters discuss Apple's exploration and ultimate rejection of ZFS. Some highlight the licensing incompatibility as the primary roadblock, with ZFS's CDDL clashing with Apple's restrictive approach. Others speculate about Apple's internal politics and the potential "not invented here" syndrome influencing the decision. A few express disappointment, believing ZFS would have significantly benefited macOS, while some counter that APFS, Apple's eventual solution, adequately addresses their needs. The potential performance implications of ZFS on Apple hardware are also debated, with some arguing that Apple's hardware is uniquely suited to ZFS's strengths. Finally, the technical challenges of integrating ZFS, especially regarding snapshots and Time Machine, are mentioned as potential reasons for Apple's decision.

The Hacker News post discussing the article "ZFS: Apple's New Filesystem that wasn't" contains a robust discussion with several compelling comments.

Several commenters discuss the licensing incompatibility between ZFS's CDDL and Apple's macOS/iOS ecosystem. One commenter succinctly explains that while Apple could have theoretically re-licensed their OS, the effort and potential instability would have outweighed the benefits. They suggest the legal complications were likely insurmountable. Another clarifies the nuanced differences between "GPL infectiousness" (which ZFS/CDDL doesn't have) and the practical impossibility of integrating CDDL code into a proprietary derivative work like macOS. This incompatibility issue is the central theme of many comments.

Another thread dives into the technical aspects of ZFS and why it might have been appealing to Apple. One commenter praises ZFS's snapshotting and checksumming capabilities, highlighting the potential for a more robust and reliable file system for macOS. However, another points out the performance overhead ZFS could introduce, particularly with Apple's focus on flash storage at the time. The discussion explores the trade-offs between features like data integrity and raw speed, suggesting Apple likely prioritized the latter for their target hardware and use cases.

Several commenters reminisce about the anticipation surrounding the rumored integration of ZFS into macOS and the subsequent disappointment. One shares personal anecdotes about testing early ZFS implementations on OS X, hinting at the promise that ultimately went unfulfilled.

The performance characteristics of ZFS are debated, with some arguing its RAM requirements would have been prohibitive for mainstream adoption on Apple hardware at the time. Counterarguments suggest that ZFS's design could have benefited from the increasing RAM capacities in later Apple machines.

Finally, some comments touch upon the political and business dynamics between Apple and Sun Microsystems (later Oracle), speculating about the potential role these relationships played in the decision. While mostly conjecture, these comments add another layer to the discussion surrounding the failed integration.

In summary, the comments section provides a multifaceted perspective on the ZFS and Apple situation, covering the legal, technical, and historical aspects of the unfulfilled integration. The discussion highlights the complexities of software licensing, the trade-offs in filesystem design, and the realities of business decisions within the tech industry.
Show HN: My self-written hobby OS is finally running on my vintage IBM ThinkPad

permalink

Posted: 2025-04-26 12:51:41

A hobby operating system, RetrOS-32, built from scratch, is now functional on a vintage IBM ThinkPad. Written primarily in C and some assembly, it supports a 32-bit protected mode environment, features a custom kernel, and boasts a simple command-line interface. Currently, functionalities include keyboard input, text-based screen output, and disk access, with the developer aiming to eventually expand to a graphical user interface and more advanced features. The project, RetrOS-32, is available on GitHub and showcases a passion for low-level programming and operating system development.

Joseph Bayer, a hobbyist operating system developer, has reached a significant milestone in a personal project: their custom-built 32-bit operating system, named RetrOS-32, is now successfully booting and running on a vintage IBM ThinkPad. This achievement marks the culmination of considerable effort invested in designing and implementing a functional operating system from scratch. RetrOS-32, hosted on GitHub, is written primarily in C and assembly language, reflecting a low-level, hands-on approach to system development.

While the specific ThinkPad model is not explicitly stated in the post title, the project demonstrates the capability of the self-developed OS to operate on real hardware, showcasing its progression beyond purely emulated environments. The project's GitHub repository likely contains the source code, documentation, and potentially build instructions for RetrOS-32, allowing others to examine the inner workings of the OS and potentially contribute to its development. This accomplishment signifies a deep understanding of operating system principles, including memory management, process scheduling, and hardware interaction. Developing a functional operating system that boots and runs on hardware is a complex undertaking, requiring meticulous attention to detail and a comprehensive understanding of low-level programming concepts. The "Show HN" nature of the post suggests a desire to share this achievement with the Hacker News community and invite feedback, fostering discussion and collaboration around the project.
Summary of Comments ( 28 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43803148

Hacker News users generally expressed enthusiasm for the RetrOS-32 project, praising the author's dedication and the impressive feat of creating a hobby OS. Several commenters reminisced about their own experiences with older hardware and OS development. Some discussed the technical aspects of the project, inquiring about the choice of programming language (C) and the possibility of adding features like protected mode or multitasking. A few users expressed interest in contributing to the project. There was also discussion about the challenges and rewards of working with older hardware, with some users sharing their own experiences and advice.

The Hacker News post titled "Show HN: My self-written hobby OS is finally running on my vintage IBM ThinkPad" (linking to the RetrOS-32 project on GitHub) generated a fair amount of discussion with a mix of praise, curiosity, and constructive feedback.

Many commenters expressed admiration for the author's dedication and the technical achievement of creating an operating system from scratch. Several described it as an inspiring project, particularly for those interested in low-level programming and OS development. Some shared their own experiences with similar endeavors, reminiscing about the challenges and rewards of such undertakings.

A recurring theme in the comments was curiosity about specific technical aspects of RetrOS-32. Users inquired about the choice of programming language (C++), the memory management strategy, the boot process, and the overall architecture of the OS. The author actively engaged with these inquiries, providing detailed explanations and insights into the design decisions.

Several commenters offered suggestions and feedback. One suggestion was to explore incorporating a specific feature related to debugging capabilities, which prompted a discussion about the potential benefits and implementation challenges. Another commenter raised a question about the long-term goals of the project, prompting the author to clarify their intentions and vision for RetrOS-32's future development.

A few commenters drew parallels to other hobby OS projects and discussed the broader landscape of OS development in general. This led to a brief exchange of opinions regarding the practicality and relevance of such projects in the modern era, with some arguing for the educational value and others emphasizing the advancements in existing operating systems.

There was also some light-hearted banter and playful comments referencing classic operating systems and the nostalgia associated with vintage hardware. This contributed to a generally positive and encouraging atmosphere in the discussion thread.
Show HN: My from-scratch OS kernel that runs DOOM

permalink

Posted: 2025-04-24 00:15:22

TacOS is a hobby operating system kernel written from scratch in C and Assembly, designed with the specific goal of running DOOM. It features a custom bootloader, memory management, keyboard driver, and a VGA driver supporting a 320x200 resolution. The kernel interfaces with a custom DOOM port, allowing the game to run directly on the bare metal without relying on any underlying operating system like DOS. This project demonstrates a minimal but functional OS capable of running a complex application, showcasing the core components required for basic system functionality.

A Hacker News user named "UnmappedStack" has proudly presented TacOS, an operating system kernel developed entirely from scratch, culminating in the impressive feat of running the classic video game DOOM. This project, hosted on GitHub, demonstrates a deep dive into low-level programming and operating system fundamentals. The kernel, written predominantly in C and a small amount of assembly language, provides the foundational software layer required to interface directly with the hardware and manage system resources. It's a testament to the builder's understanding of crucial OS components like memory management, process scheduling, and interrupt handling. The fact that it can run a graphically demanding game like DOOM indicates a functional graphics driver and sufficient performance capabilities. While the primary goal and achievement highlighted is running DOOM, the project likely involves a multitude of underlying functionalities necessary for any operating system, including file system interaction (although perhaps limited), input handling, and the intricate dance between hardware and software to create a cohesive and functional computing environment. The project showcases not only the technical prowess required to build such a system but also the dedication and perseverance involved in such a complex undertaking. The ability to boot and run a game like DOOM within this self-built environment signifies a significant milestone and a comprehensive understanding of the core principles of operating system design. This project is likely a personal learning endeavor, demonstrating the creator's journey through the complexities of building an OS from the ground up, brick by digital brick.
Summary of Comments ( 60 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43778081

HN commenters generally express interest in the TacOS project, praising the author's initiative and the educational value of writing a kernel from scratch. Some commend the clean code and documentation, while others offer suggestions for improvement, such as exploring different memory management strategies or implementing a proper filesystem. A few users express skepticism about the "from scratch" claim, pointing out the use of existing libraries like GRUB and the inherent reliance on hardware specifications. Overall, the comments are positive and encouraging, acknowledging the difficulty of the project and the author's accomplishment. Some users engage in deeper technical discussion about specific implementation details and offer alternative approaches.

The Hacker News post titled "Show HN: My from-scratch OS kernel that runs DOOM" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43778081) has generated a number of comments discussing various aspects of the project.

Several commenters praised the author for undertaking such a challenging and educational project. They acknowledge the significant effort required to build an OS kernel from scratch, especially one capable of running a complex game like DOOM. This sentiment is expressed through comments like "Impressive work!" and affirmations of the learning experience inherent in such an endeavor.

A significant portion of the discussion revolves around the technical details of the project. Commenters inquire about specific implementation choices, such as memory management, interrupt handling, and the process of porting DOOM to the custom kernel. The author actively engages with these questions, providing insights into the design decisions and the challenges encountered during development. This back-and-forth creates a rich technical exchange, delving into the intricacies of OS development.

The choice of DOOM as the demonstration application also sparks conversation. Some commenters express nostalgia for the classic game and appreciate the demonstration of the kernel's capabilities. Others discuss the practical implications of running a game on a custom kernel, touching upon performance considerations and the potential for future development.

There's discussion about the project's licensing, with some commenters raising questions about the use of GPL components and their implications for the overall project license. This leads to a brief discussion about open-source licensing and its practical application in such projects.

A few commenters offer constructive criticism and suggestions for improvement. These include recommendations for code optimization, potential features to add, and resources for further learning. This feedback demonstrates the collaborative nature of the Hacker News community and the willingness to help fellow developers improve their projects.

Finally, some comments focus on the educational value of such projects. They highlight the importance of hands-on experience in understanding the inner workings of an operating system and encourage others to undertake similar endeavors. This reinforces the theme of learning and exploration that permeates the discussion.
How a 20 year old bug in GTA San Andreas surfaced in Windows 11 24H2

permalink

Posted: 2025-04-23 14:00:11

A 20-year-old bug in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, related to how the game handles specific low-level keyboard input, resurfaced in Windows 11 24H2. This bug, originally present in the 2005 release, causes the game to minimize when certain key combinations are pressed, particularly involving the right Windows key. The issue stemmed from DirectInput, a now-deprecated API used for game controllers, and wasn't previously problematic because older versions of Windows handled the spurious messages differently. Windows 11's updated input stack now surfaces these messages to the game, triggering the minimize behavior. A workaround exists by using a third-party DirectInput wrapper or running the game in compatibility mode for Windows 7.

A curious and rather amusing bug recently emerged, affecting users of Windows 11 24H2 who also happen to be fans of the classic video game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. This bug, dormant for two decades, resurfaced due to a specific interaction between the game and the operating system's new memory manager. The issue manifested as distorted visuals within the game, specifically corrupt textures and graphical artifacts, rendering San Andreas virtually unplayable.

The root cause can be traced back to a memory allocation technique used by the game dating back to its original 2004 release. San Andreas, optimized for older hardware and operating systems, employed a method of directly writing to specific memory addresses within the game's address space. This practice, while functional in the past, clashes with the modern memory management strategies implemented in Windows 11 24H2. The new memory manager, designed for enhanced security and efficiency, employs stricter controls over how applications access and modify memory. This stricter control inadvertently interferes with San Andreas's legacy memory access patterns.

More specifically, Windows 11 24H2's memory manager seems to misinterpret San Andreas's direct memory writes. Instead of allowing the game to modify the intended texture data, the operating system prevents or redirects these writes, leading to the corrupted visuals observed by players. The author highlights that this issue is not unique to San Andreas; other older games employing similar memory manipulation techniques could potentially exhibit similar compatibility problems on Windows 11 24H2. This underscores the challenges faced when maintaining backward compatibility with legacy software on constantly evolving operating systems.

Interestingly, the bug's manifestation isn't consistent across all hardware configurations. Some users reported no issues, while others experienced severe graphical glitches. This variability suggests that factors like specific graphics drivers or system configurations might play a role in whether the bug is triggered. The blog post meticulously details the author's investigation process, showcasing their use of debugging tools and memory analysis to pinpoint the problem's origin. Through careful observation and experimentation, they demonstrated how specific memory addresses accessed by San Andreas were being handled differently by the updated memory manager. The author concluded by suggesting potential workarounds, including running the game in compatibility mode for older Windows versions, although the effectiveness of these workarounds seemed to vary. The post serves as a fascinating example of how legacy software can unexpectedly interact with modern operating systems, highlighting the complexities of maintaining backward compatibility in the ever-evolving landscape of computer technology.
Summary of Comments ( 48 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43772311

Commenters on Hacker News discuss the GTA San Andreas bug triggered by Windows 11 24H2, mostly focusing on the technical aspects. Several highlight the likely culprit: a change in how Windows handles thread local storage (TLS) callbacks, specifically the order of execution. One compelling comment notes the difficulty in debugging such issues, as the problem might not lie within the game's code itself, but rather in the interaction with the OS, making it hard to pinpoint and fix. Others mention the impressive longevity of the game and express surprise that such a bug could remain hidden for so long, while some jokingly lament the "progress" of Windows updates. A few commenters share their own experiences with similar obscure bugs and the challenges they posed.

The Hacker News post discussing a 20-year-old bug in GTA San Andreas surfacing in Windows 11 24H2 has several comments exploring the technical aspects and implications of the issue.

One commenter highlights the complexity of software interactions, pointing out how a seemingly unrelated change in the operating system can unexpectedly trigger dormant bugs in older applications. They emphasize the difficulty in predicting such issues, especially in large and intricate systems like Windows and a game as complex as GTA San Andreas.

Another comment delves into the specifics of the bug, explaining how the change in Windows 11's handling of specific instructions, particularly related to floating-point operations and denormalized numbers, led to the game's malfunction. This explanation provides a technical understanding of why the bug only surfaced after the Windows update.

Several commenters discuss the challenges faced by developers in maintaining backward compatibility, especially over such long periods. They note that anticipating all possible interactions between a game and future operating system updates is practically impossible. The idea of "bit rot," where software gradually degrades over time due to changes in the surrounding technological environment, is also mentioned.

One commenter mentions a similar experience with another older game, illustrating that this kind of issue isn't unique to GTA San Andreas and highlighting the broader challenge of preserving software functionality across evolving platforms.

There's a discussion about the nature of denormalized numbers and their impact on performance. One commenter questions the practical necessity of handling denormalized numbers in modern hardware and software, suggesting that their support might be more trouble than it's worth in some contexts.

Finally, a few commenters offer potential workarounds for the issue, such as disabling hardware acceleration or using compatibility modes in Windows 11. These suggestions provide practical solutions for users affected by the bug while waiting for a permanent fix.
A Farewell to the ArcoLinux University

permalink

Posted: 2025-04-13 04:02:47

Erik Dubois is ending the ArcoLinux University project due to burnout and a desire to focus on other ArcoLinux aspects, like the ArcoLinux ISO. While grateful for the community contributions and positive impact the University had, maintaining it became too demanding. He emphasizes that all the University content will remain available and free on GitHub and YouTube, allowing users to continue learning at their own pace. Dubois encourages the community to collaborate and potentially fork the project if they wish to continue its development actively. He looks forward to simplifying his workload and dedicating more time to other passions within the ArcoLinux ecosystem.

Erik Dubois, the creator and driving force behind ArcoLinux, a popular Arch Linux-based distribution, has announced the discontinuation of the ArcoLinux University, a comprehensive online learning platform dedicated to teaching users the intricacies of Arch Linux and related topics. This platform, meticulously crafted over several years, offered a structured curriculum encompassing various aspects of Arch Linux, from basic installation and configuration to advanced topics like building custom kernels, scripting, and containerization. Dubois cites a combination of factors leading to this difficult decision. Primarily, he acknowledges the considerable time commitment required to maintain and update the vast amount of educational material hosted within the university, a burden that has become increasingly difficult to manage alongside his other responsibilities. The ever-evolving nature of Arch Linux and related software necessitates constant revisions and updates to ensure the curriculum's accuracy and relevance, further exacerbating the maintenance burden.

Furthermore, Dubois expresses a desire to shift his focus towards other projects within the ArcoLinux ecosystem, specifically highlighting his interest in exploring and developing new ISO flavors. These ISO images represent pre-configured variations of ArcoLinux tailored to different desktop environments and use cases, providing users with more streamlined installation options. By concentrating his efforts on these endeavors, Dubois aims to enhance the overall user experience and expand the accessibility of ArcoLinux to a broader audience. While recognizing the value and impact of the ArcoLinux University, he believes this redirection of resources will ultimately benefit the community in the long run. Although the university's content will no longer be actively maintained, Dubois intends to keep the existing materials available online as a static archive, allowing users to continue accessing and utilizing the wealth of knowledge accumulated within the platform. This archive will serve as a valuable resource for those seeking to learn about Arch Linux, albeit without the dynamic updates and support previously offered. The announcement expresses a sense of melancholy regarding the closure but also an optimistic outlook on the future of ArcoLinux and its continued evolution.
Summary of Comments ( 11 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43669990

Hacker News users reacted with general understanding and support for Erik Dubois' decision to shut down the ArcoLinux University portion of his project. Several commenters praised his significant contribution to the Linux community through his extensive documentation, tutorials, and ISO releases. Some expressed disappointment at the closure but acknowledged the immense effort required to maintain such a resource. Others discussed the challenges of maintaining open-source projects and the burnout that can result, sympathizing with Dubois' situation. A few commenters inquired about the future of the existing University content, with suggestions for archiving or community-led continuation of the project. The overall sentiment reflected appreciation for Dubois' work and a recognition of the difficulties in sustaining complex, free educational resources.

The Hacker News post "A Farewell to the ArcoLinux University" has generated several comments discussing the announcement of the discontinuation of the ArcoLinux University project.

Several commenters expressed sadness at the project's closure, acknowledging the valuable resource it provided for learning about Arch Linux and related topics. One commenter specifically mentioned benefiting from the clear and concise explanations provided by the University's materials. Another expressed disappointment, stating that they were just beginning to explore the resources and had found them helpful.

A few commenters speculated about the reasons behind the closure, with some suggesting burnout or the extensive maintenance required for such a project. The maintainability of a project like ArcoLinux University, which involved keeping documentation and scripts up-to-date with the rapidly changing Arch Linux ecosystem, was highlighted as a significant challenge.

One commenter drew parallels between the ArcoLinux University and other community-driven projects that eventually fade away due to the sustained effort required to keep them running. This commenter emphasized the difficulty of maintaining enthusiasm and dedication over the long term for these types of endeavors.

There was discussion about the nature of free, user-generated content and the inherent risk of its disappearance. Commenters acknowledged that while such resources are incredibly valuable, their continued existence is never guaranteed. This led to a brief conversation about the importance of appreciating and supporting such projects while they are active.

Some commenters mentioned alternative resources for learning Arch Linux, including the official Arch Wiki and other community forums. This suggests that while the ArcoLinux University will be missed, the community continues to have access to a wealth of information and support.

Finally, some commenters expressed gratitude towards the creator of ArcoLinux University for their work and dedication over the years. They recognized the significant effort involved in creating and maintaining such a comprehensive resource.
Experimental release of GrapheneOS for Pixel 9a

permalink

Posted: 2025-04-13 01:05:31

GrapheneOS, a privacy and security-focused mobile operating system, has released an experimental build for the Pixel 9a (codename "bluejay"). This release marks initial support for the device, but is considered experimental and may have some instability. Users are cautioned that this build is not yet suitable for daily use due to the potential for bugs and incomplete features. While core functionality like calls, messaging, and camera access should work, further testing and development are ongoing before it reaches a stable, recommended state. The announcement encourages users to report any issues they encounter to help improve the build.

GrapheneOS, a privacy and security-focused mobile operating system based on the Android Open Source Project (AOSP), has announced the experimental release of their operating system for the Google Pixel 9a (codenamed "bluejay"). This release signifies an expansion of GrapheneOS's device support and provides an option for users specifically interested in utilizing the Pixel 9a hardware with a hardened operating system prioritizing privacy and security.

While designated as "experimental," this release represents a significant step towards official support. The announcement emphasizes that the core functionalities are largely working as intended. However, the "experimental" label indicates that the software may still contain undiscovered bugs or require further refinement before being considered fully stable for everyday use by the average consumer. The developers are actively encouraging user feedback and bug reports to facilitate this refinement process and expedite the transition from experimental to stable status.

The post also highlights the integration of the latest modem firmware from the June Android Security Bulletin, underscoring the project's commitment to maintaining up-to-date security protections. This focus on promptly incorporating security patches is a key aspect of GrapheneOS's overall security posture.

Users interested in trying the experimental build are directed to the official GrapheneOS website for detailed installation instructions. The developers caution against installing this build if a user relies on the Pixel 9a as their primary device due to the potential for unforeseen issues associated with experimental software. This recommendation highlights the importance of understanding the risks involved with pre-release software and suggests waiting for a stable release for mission-critical devices. The post further emphasizes the importance of reviewing the provided installation instructions carefully before proceeding to minimize the chance of encountering problems during the installation process.
Summary of Comments ( 166 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43669185

Hacker News users discussed the experimental Pixel 9a GrapheneOS release, expressing excitement but also caution. Several praised GrapheneOS's security focus and the expansion of supported devices. Some questioned the practicality of using a less mainstream OS and potential compatibility issues with apps. The discussion also touched on the challenges of maintaining a hardened OS and the trade-offs between security and convenience. A few users shared their positive experiences with GrapheneOS on other Pixel devices, while others raised concerns about the "experimental" tag and potential bugs. Overall, the sentiment was positive but tempered with pragmatic considerations.

The Hacker News post titled "Experimental release of GrapheneOS for Pixel 9a" has generated a moderate number of comments, mostly focusing on the practical implications of using GrapheneOS on the Pixel 9a and comparisons to other privacy-focused operating systems like CalyxOS.

Several commenters discuss the trade-offs between security and usability. One commenter notes the inconvenience of needing a secondary device for initial setup and questions the necessity of this requirement. This sparks a small thread discussing the rationale behind it, with others explaining that it's a security measure to prevent compromised host devices from interfering with the installation process.

Another significant thread revolves around the comparison between GrapheneOS and CalyxOS. Commenters delve into the nuances of their differing approaches to security and privacy. One commenter argues that CalyxOS offers a more user-friendly experience while still providing robust security, while another counters that GrapheneOS prioritizes hardening at a lower level, making it a more secure, albeit less convenient, option. The discussion touches on specific features like microG and the availability of banking apps, highlighting the practical considerations for users choosing between the two.

A few comments also mention the Pixel 9a's hardware limitations, particularly regarding its modem, and how these might impact the overall performance and security of GrapheneOS on the device.

Some users express interest in the experimental release and inquire about specific aspects like camera performance and battery life. However, as the release is experimental, concrete answers are limited.

While there isn't an overwhelming number of comments, the existing discussion provides valuable insights into the perceived advantages and disadvantages of GrapheneOS on the Pixel 9a, focusing particularly on the balance between security, usability, and the practicalities of daily usage compared to alternatives like CalyxOS. The thread also highlights some of the technical limitations imposed by the Pixel 9a's hardware.
Learning to Program with Haiku

permalink

Posted: 2025-04-10 03:41:49

The Haiku-OS.org post "Learning to Program with Haiku" provides a comprehensive starting point for aspiring Haiku developers. It highlights the simplicity and power of the Haiku API for creating GUI applications, using the native C++ framework and readily available examples. The guide emphasizes practical learning through modifying existing code and exploring the extensive documentation and example projects provided within the Haiku source code. It also points to resources like the Be Book (covering the BeOS API, which Haiku largely inherits), mailing lists, and the IRC channel for community support. The post ultimately encourages exploration and experimentation as the most effective way to learn Haiku development, positioning it as an accessible and rewarding platform for both beginners and experienced programmers.

The Haiku operating system website hosts a comprehensive guide entitled "Learning to Program with Haiku," serving as an introductory resource for individuals interested in software development specifically within the Haiku environment. This guide meticulously covers a broad spectrum of topics, starting with the fundamental concepts of setting up a development environment. It elucidates the process of acquiring the necessary tools, including the Haiku Software Development Kit (SDK), and configuring them for optimal performance. The guide then delves into the intricacies of the Haiku Application Kit (API), providing detailed explanations of its various components and functionalities. This includes a thorough examination of the available classes and interfaces, which are essential building blocks for creating Haiku applications.

Further enhancing the learning experience, the guide incorporates practical examples demonstrating the application of these concepts in real-world scenarios. These examples, provided in the C++ programming language, illustrate how to effectively utilize the Haiku API to build functional applications, covering aspects such as user interface design, event handling, and data management. The document emphasizes the object-oriented nature of the Haiku API and provides clear guidance on structuring code using classes and objects. It also covers more advanced topics such as multithreading and networking, enabling developers to create more sophisticated and interactive applications.

Beyond the core API, the guide extends its scope to encompass other relevant aspects of Haiku development. This includes information on using the Interface Definition Language (IDL) for defining interfaces and interacting with system services, as well as best practices for coding style and project organization. Furthermore, the guide offers valuable insights into debugging techniques and resources available within the Haiku ecosystem. By providing a structured approach to learning, complemented by practical examples and detailed explanations, "Learning to Program with Haiku" empowers aspiring developers to confidently embark on their journey of creating applications specifically tailored for the Haiku operating system, taking full advantage of its unique capabilities.
- Haiku OS
- Haiku
- programming
- development
- Tutorial
- C++
- BeOS
- Operating System
- Software Development
- coding
- Beginner
- learning
Summary of Comments ( 37 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43640403

Commenters on Hacker News largely expressed nostalgia and fondness for Haiku OS, praising its clean design and the tutorial's approachable nature for beginners. Some recalled their positive experiences with BeOS and appreciated Haiku's continuation of its legacy. Several users highlighted Haiku's suitability for older hardware and embedded systems. A few comments delved into technical aspects, discussing the merits of Haiku's API and its potential as a development platform. One commenter noted the tutorial's focus on GUI programming as a smart move to showcase Haiku's strengths. The overall sentiment was positive, with many expressing interest in revisiting or trying Haiku based on the tutorial.

The Hacker News post "Learning to Program with Haiku" has generated several comments discussing various aspects of Haiku OS and its suitability for learning programming.

Several commenters praised Haiku's simplicity and the nostalgic appeal of its BeOS heritage. One user highlighted its clean API and the ease of getting started with development, comparing it favorably to the complexities of modern Linux distributions. They suggested that Haiku's relative simplicity allows beginners to focus on core programming concepts without being overwhelmed by the intricacies of a large and complex operating system. This sentiment was echoed by another commenter who appreciated Haiku's small size and the availability of source code, making it an ideal environment for learning and experimentation.

The discussion also touched upon Haiku's suitability as a primary operating system. While acknowledging its qualities, some users pointed out the limitations of driver support and software availability compared to more mainstream operating systems. One commenter specifically mentioned the lack of certain applications that might be essential for a typical user. However, another commenter countered this point by highlighting the potential of Haiku as a secondary OS for focused programming tasks, suggesting that its minimalist nature could enhance productivity.

Performance and the active development community were also discussed. One commenter praised Haiku's speed, attributing it to its efficient design. Others commented on the welcoming nature of the Haiku community and its responsiveness to new developers. The possibility of contributing to the operating system itself was presented as an attractive aspect for learning and gaining experience.

Finally, the conversation branched out into related topics such as the benefits of learning C++ and the role of personal projects in programming education. One commenter emphasized the importance of building tangible projects to solidify learning, suggesting that Haiku could provide a suitable platform for such endeavors. Another commenter discussed the value of learning C++ and its relevance in understanding systems programming. This tied back to Haiku as a potential learning environment where understanding C++ could be directly applied to OS development.
NTATV: Bringing Windows NT (Windows XP, Windows 2003) to the Original Apple TV

permalink

Posted: 2025-04-09 03:00:01

NTATV is a project aiming to port Windows NT 4, along with later versions like Windows XP and Windows Server 2003, to the first-generation Apple TV. This involves creating custom drivers and leveraging the existing PowerPC architecture of the device. The goal is to achieve a functional Windows installation on the Apple TV, providing a unique and retro computing experience. The project is still under development, but progress is being documented, including details on hardware compatibility and the challenges encountered.

The NTATV project aims to port Microsoft Windows NT-based operating systems, specifically Windows XP and Windows Server 2003, to the first-generation Apple TV. This endeavor leverages the Apple TV's hardware, which consists of a modified PowerPC P102 processor (similar to the Xbox 360's CPU), an Nvidia GeForce Go 7300 GPU, 256MB of RAM, and 40GB or 160GB of hard drive space. The project seeks to overcome the inherent challenges of adapting an x86 operating system designed for Intel/AMD processors to the PowerPC architecture of the Apple TV. This necessitates a complex process involving extensive patching of the Windows NT kernel and associated drivers to function on the PowerPC instruction set. The goal is to achieve a bootable and (ideally) functional installation of these Windows versions on the Apple TV, enabling users to run software compatible with these older operating systems on this unique hardware platform. The project maintains meticulous documentation of the porting process, highlighting the necessary modifications, challenges encountered, and progress made. The project creator acknowledges the experimental nature of this undertaking, recognizing that full compatibility and stability are long-term goals. While the primary focus is on Windows XP and Windows Server 2003, the project potentially lays the groundwork for porting other NT-based operating systems to the Apple TV in the future. The project embraces open-source principles and encourages community involvement in furthering its development. NTATV represents a compelling example of software and hardware hacking, pushing the boundaries of what's possible with older technology.
Summary of Comments ( 10 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43628500

Hacker News users discussed the practicality and legality of running Windows NT on the original Apple TV, expressing skepticism about its usefulness given the hardware limitations. Some questioned the legality of distributing modified Apple firmware and using copyrighted Windows components. Others were curious about the technical challenges involved, particularly regarding driver support and performance. There was some interest in the project as a nostalgic exploration of older operating systems, but overall the comments were more focused on the project's limitations and potential legal issues than its potential benefits. A few users speculated about alternative approaches, such as using a virtual machine, which might offer a more efficient way to achieve similar results.

The Hacker News post titled "NTATV: Bringing Windows NT (Windows XP, Windows 2003) to the Original Apple TV" has generated a modest number of comments, mostly focusing on the technical challenges and novelty of the project.

Several commenters expressed fascination with the ingenuity involved in porting Windows NT to such a unique and resource-constrained device. They discussed the intricacies of dealing with the Apple TV's PowerPC architecture and limited resources, highlighting the developer's skill in overcoming these obstacles. One commenter specifically praised the effort required to get the graphics working, acknowledging the complexities of different graphics subsystems and the developer's success in making it functional.

There was a discussion about the practical uses of such a project. Some commenters questioned the utility of running Windows NT on an original Apple TV, while others speculated on potential applications like retro gaming or using period-correct software. One commenter mused about the possibility of running old PC games, while another suggested it could be useful for preserving and interacting with older software that might not run well on modern systems.

A few comments delved into the technical details of the porting process. One commenter inquired about the specifics of the USB support implementation, prompting a response from the project creator (DistroHopper39B) explaining the method used and the limitations encountered. Another comment touched on the challenges of storage limitations, with suggestions for using external storage solutions.

The overall sentiment is one of appreciation for the technical achievement. While the practical applications might be niche, the project is recognized as a demonstration of skill and a testament to the enduring fascination with retro computing and pushing the boundaries of what's possible with older hardware. The comments don't reflect widespread interest, but rather a focused discussion amongst technically-minded individuals intrigued by the project's unique nature.
Apple’s Darwin OS and XNU Kernel Deep Dive

permalink

Posted: 2025-04-05 23:46:19

This blog post explores the architecture and evolution of Darwin, Apple's open-source operating system foundation, and its XNU kernel. It explains how Darwin, built upon the Mach microkernel, incorporates components from BSD and Apple's own I/O Kit. The post details the hybrid kernel approach of XNU, combining the message-passing benefits of a microkernel with the performance advantages of a monolithic kernel. It discusses key XNU subsystems like the process manager, memory manager, file system, and networking stack, highlighting the interplay between Mach and BSD layers. The post also traces Darwin's history, from its NeXTSTEP origins through its evolution into macOS, iOS, watchOS, and tvOS, emphasizing the platform's adaptability and performance.

This blog post, titled "Apple’s Darwin OS and XNU Kernel: A Deep Dive," offers a comprehensive exploration of the underpinnings of Apple's operating systems, macOS, iOS, iPadOS, watchOS, and tvOS, all of which are built upon the Darwin foundation. It begins by clarifying the relationship between Darwin, a fully functional open-source operating system, and XNU, the hybrid kernel at the heart of Darwin. The author emphasizes that Darwin isn't merely the kernel, but a complete OS encompassing the kernel, core utilities, and a collection of system tools, while XNU specifically refers to the kernel itself.

The post then delves into the historical evolution of XNU, tracing its lineage back to the Carnegie Mellon University's Mach microkernel, explaining how Apple adopted and adapted it in the NeXTSTEP operating system. This historical context highlights the significance of the "NU" in XNU, standing for "NeXTSTEP Unix," signifying its origin and its eventual merging with components of the FreeBSD kernel to achieve its present hybrid microkernel/monolithic kernel architecture. The benefits of this hybrid approach are explained, balancing the message-passing efficiency and modularity of a microkernel with the performance advantages of a monolithic kernel.

The architectural breakdown of XNU forms a core part of the post. It describes the three primary layers: the Mach microkernel, the BSD subsystem, and the I/O Kit. The Mach layer handles low-level tasks like inter-process communication, virtual memory management, and task scheduling. The BSD layer provides a Unix-like environment, offering familiar system calls and functionalities to developers. The I/O Kit is highlighted as a crucial component for device driver management, streamlining the process of developing and integrating drivers for various hardware.

The post further elucidates the role of kernel extensions (KEXTs), now largely superseded by DriverKit extensions, within the XNU architecture. It explains how these extensions expand kernel functionality and serve as the primary mechanism for driver interaction. The transition from KEXTs to DriverKit is discussed, emphasizing the security and stability improvements this shift brings by running drivers outside the kernel space.

Finally, the post underscores the open-source nature of Darwin, enabling anyone to explore, modify, and contribute to its development. It explains how to access the Darwin source code, highlighting the opportunity for learning and engagement with the operating system's internals. The article concludes by encouraging readers to explore the rich resources available for deeper understanding, suggesting further research and exploration for those interested in gaining a more comprehensive knowledge of Darwin and XNU.
- Apple
- Darwin
- XNU
- Kernel
- Operating System
- macOS
- iOS
- iPadOS
- WatchOS
- tvOS
- Mach
- BSD
- unix
- microkernel
- Hybrid Kernel
- system architecture
- Deep Dive
- Technical
- Software
- Computer Science
Summary of Comments ( 111 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43597778

Hacker News users generally praised the article for its clarity and depth in explaining a complex topic. Several commenters with kernel development experience validated the information presented, noting its accuracy and helpfulness for understanding the evolution of XNU. Some discussion arose around specific architectural choices made by Apple, including the Mach microkernel and its interaction with the BSD environment. One commenter highlighted the performance benefits of the hybrid kernel approach, while others expressed interest in the challenges of maintaining such a system. A few users also pointed out areas where the article could be expanded, such as delving further into I/O Kit details and exploring the security implications of the XNU architecture.

The Hacker News post discussing the "Apple’s Darwin OS and XNU Kernel Deep Dive" blog post has a moderate number of comments, offering various perspectives and additional information related to the topic.

Several commenters praised the original blog post for its clarity and comprehensiveness. One user described it as a "great writeup" and expressed appreciation for the author's effort in explaining a complex topic in an accessible manner. Another commenter highlighted the value of the historical context provided in the blog post, emphasizing its contribution to a deeper understanding of the XNU kernel's evolution.

A significant portion of the discussion revolved around Mach, the microkernel underlying XNU. Commenters delved into the technical aspects of Mach, discussing its design principles, its role within XNU, and its relationship to other operating systems. One user recalled their experience working with Mach at Carnegie Mellon University, offering personal anecdotes and insights into the challenges and complexities associated with microkernel-based systems. Another commenter compared and contrasted Mach with other microkernels, highlighting the unique characteristics and trade-offs of each approach. This technical discussion provided valuable context for understanding the XNU kernel's architecture and its historical development.

Beyond the technical details, some comments explored the practical implications of XNU's design. One user raised concerns about the security implications of using a hybrid kernel, questioning the effectiveness of the microkernel approach in mitigating vulnerabilities. Another comment touched on the performance characteristics of XNU, speculating on the potential impact of its architecture on the overall responsiveness and efficiency of macOS.

Finally, some commenters shared additional resources and links related to Darwin and XNU. These resources included official documentation, technical papers, and open-source projects, providing further avenues for exploring the topic in greater depth. One user specifically mentioned the XNU source code, encouraging others to delve into the codebase to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the kernel's inner workings.

In summary, the Hacker News comments offer a blend of praise for the original blog post, in-depth technical discussions about Mach and XNU, practical considerations regarding security and performance, and pointers to additional resources. While not an overwhelmingly large number of comments, they provide a valuable supplement to the blog post, offering diverse perspectives and enriching the overall understanding of the topic.
Linux Kernel Defence Map – Security Hardening Concepts

permalink

Posted: 2025-04-05 22:16:54
The Linux Kernel Defence Map provides a comprehensive overview of security hardening mechanisms available within the Linux kernel. It categorizes these techniques into areas like memory management, access control, and exploit mitigation, visually mapping them to specific kernel subsystems and features. The map serves as a resource for understanding how various kernel configurations and security modules contribute to a robust and secure system, aiding in both defensive hardening and vulnerability research by illustrating the relationships between different protection layers. It aims to offer a practical guide for navigating the complex landscape of Linux kernel security.
The Linux Kernel Defence Map, presented on GitHub by user a13xp0p0v, offers a comprehensive, visually-oriented guide to various security hardening techniques applicable to the Linux kernel. It serves as a roadmap for system administrators and security professionals seeking to enhance the security posture of their Linux systems by leveraging kernel-level defenses.

The map categorizes these defenses into several key domains, reflecting different layers and aspects of kernel security. These include:
- Kernel Self-Protection: This area focuses on mechanisms that protect the kernel itself from exploitation. Techniques listed encompass Kernel Address Space Layout Randomization (KASLR), which randomizes the location of kernel code in memory, and Kernel Page Table Isolation (KPTI/KAISER), which isolates user-space and kernel-space page tables to mitigate Meltdown-type vulnerabilities. It also covers Supervisor Mode Access Prevention (SMAP) and Supervisor Mode Execution Protection (SMEP), which restrict access and execution from supervisor mode to user-space memory, preventing certain types of privilege escalation attacks.
- Memory Management Hardening: This domain deals with securing the kernel's memory management subsystem. It includes strategies like restricting memory allocations with SLAB_FREELIST_HARDENED, enabling memory tagging extensions like ARM Memory Tagging Extension (MTE), and implementing hardened usercopy functions to prevent vulnerabilities arising from copying data between user and kernel space.
- Capability-Based Security: This section outlines the use of Linux capabilities, which provide a finer-grained alternative to traditional root privileges, allowing processes to have specific privileges without granting full administrative access. This helps limit the potential damage from compromised processes.
- Namespaces and Seccomp: These features isolate processes from each other and the system, limiting their access to resources and system calls. Namespaces create isolated environments for processes, while Seccomp allows restricting the system calls a process can make. This restricts the attack surface available to a malicious process.
- Security Modules: The map covers various security modules like SELinux, AppArmor, and TOMOYO Linux, which provide mandatory access control (MAC) frameworks. These modules enforce predefined security policies, restricting access to resources based on labels and rules, even for privileged processes. This adds an additional layer of security beyond traditional discretionary access control.
- Cryptographic API Hardening: This area addresses securing cryptographic operations within the kernel. It highlights the use of cryptographic agility, enabling constant-time cryptographic algorithms to prevent timing attacks, and using a hardware security module (HSM) to offload sensitive cryptographic operations to a dedicated secure device.
- Auditing and Intrusion Detection: This category covers mechanisms to monitor kernel activity and detect suspicious events. It includes the use of the audit subsystem for logging security-relevant events, and integrating kernel instrumentation with intrusion detection systems.
- Exploit Mitigation Techniques: The map lists various exploit mitigation methods, like stack canaries, which detect stack overflows, and Shadow Stacks, which protect return addresses from modification. These techniques make it more difficult for attackers to exploit vulnerabilities.
The Linux Kernel Defence Map provides a valuable overview, presenting these security hardening concepts in a structured and accessible format. It serves as a starting point for those looking to understand and implement kernel-level security measures, offering a broad perspective on the landscape of available techniques and guiding further research into specific areas of interest. However, it's crucial to note that security is a continuous process, and this map represents a snapshot of current best practices, not a complete or static solution. Continuous learning and adaptation are essential for maintaining a robust security posture.
- Linux
- Kernel
- Security
- Hardening
- Defense
- map
- exploitation
- Vulnerability
- Mitigation
- system calls
- Privilege Escalation
- Rootkit
- Malware
- Threat Modeling
- Cybersecurity
- Operating System
- Open Source
Summary of Comments ( 10 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43597264

Hacker News users generally praised the Linux Kernel Defence Map for its comprehensiveness and visual clarity. Several commenters pointed out its value for both learning and as a quick reference for experienced kernel developers. Some suggested improvements, including adding more details on specific mitigations, expanding coverage to areas like user namespaces and eBPF, and potentially creating an interactive version. A few users discussed the project's scope, questioning the inclusion of certain features and debating the effectiveness of some mitigations. There was also a short discussion comparing the map to other security resources.

The Hacker News post titled "Linux Kernel Defence Map – Security Hardening Concepts" generated several comments discussing the linked resource, a mind map visualizing various Linux kernel security hardening mechanisms.

Several commenters praised the map for its comprehensive overview and visual appeal. One user described it as "extremely helpful" and appreciated the clear organization of complex information. Another lauded the project's "great work" and found it beneficial for both learning and review. The visual nature of the map was highlighted as a key strength, allowing users to quickly grasp the relationships between different security concepts.

Some commenters focused on the map's practicality and usefulness. One suggested using it for security audits or as a reference during incident response. Another highlighted its potential as a learning tool, allowing users to delve deeper into specific areas based on their interests. The ability to see the interconnectedness of various security mechanisms was also mentioned as valuable for developing a holistic understanding of kernel security.

Several comments discussed specific aspects of kernel security and their representation in the map. Discussion arose around kernel self-protection mechanisms and their limitations. One commenter pointed out the trade-off between security and performance, emphasizing that implementing every hardening technique could have performance implications. Another mentioned the importance of keeping the map updated as new security features are introduced in the kernel. The inclusion of specific kernel modules and their functionalities was also discussed.

A few commenters suggested improvements or additions to the map. One recommended including links to relevant documentation or resources for each security mechanism. Another proposed adding a section on eBPF-based security tools. The possibility of creating an interactive version of the map was also mentioned.

Overall, the comments reflected a positive reception of the Linux Kernel Defence Map. Commenters appreciated its comprehensive nature, visual clarity, and practical value for both learning and professional use. While some suggestions for improvements were made, the overall consensus was that the map provides a valuable resource for anyone interested in understanding and enhancing Linux kernel security.
InitWare, a portable systemd fork running on BSDs and Linux

permalink

Posted: 2025-04-03 12:11:51
InitWare is a portable init system inspired by systemd, designed to function across multiple operating systems, including Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD. It aims to provide a familiar systemd-like experience and API on these platforms while remaining lightweight and configurable. The project utilizes a combination of C and POSIX sh for portability and reimplements core systemd functionalities like service management, device management, and login management. InitWare seeks to offer a viable alternative to traditional init systems on BSDs and a more streamlined and potentially faster option compared to full systemd on Linux.
InitWare presents itself as a portable and lightweight reimplementation of systemd, designed to operate on a wider range of operating systems, specifically including various BSDs (FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, and potentially DragonFly BSD) and Linux. The project aims to provide the core functionality and perceived benefits of systemd without being tightly coupled to the Linux kernel or GNU userland tools.

Key features and goals of InitWare include:
- Cross-platform Compatibility: A primary focus is on operating seamlessly across multiple operating systems, offering a unified init system experience regardless of the underlying kernel or userland. This allows users familiar with systemd on Linux to leverage their knowledge on BSD systems.
- Reimplementation, Not a Port: InitWare is built from the ground up, drawing inspiration from systemd's architecture and functionality but not directly porting its existing codebase. This approach allows for greater flexibility in adapting to the specific requirements of different operating systems.
- Lightweight Design: InitWare strives to maintain a smaller footprint than systemd, potentially resulting in faster boot times and reduced resource consumption, especially on resource-constrained systems. This is achieved by focusing on core functionalities and avoiding unnecessary dependencies.
- systemd Feature Parity (Eventual Goal): While still under active development, the project aims to eventually achieve feature parity with a significant subset of systemd's functionality, including service management, socket activation, device management, and logging. This allows for consistent management of system resources and services across different platforms.
- BSD Integration: On BSD systems, InitWare integrates with the base system’s utilities and conventions wherever possible, minimizing friction and ensuring a smoother user experience within the BSD ecosystem.
- Written in C: The project utilizes C as its primary programming language, prioritizing performance, portability, and close-to-the-metal control.
- Open Source: InitWare is released under a permissive open-source license (ISC), encouraging community contributions and further development.
The project is currently in active development, meaning not all planned features are fully implemented or stable. The degree of compatibility and feature completeness across different operating systems may also vary. Despite its early stage, InitWare represents an ambitious undertaking to bring a systemd-like init system experience to a wider audience, potentially bridging the gap between Linux and BSD systems.
- systemd
- init
- BSD
- Linux
- portable
- init system
- OS
- Operating System
- unix
- fork
- InitWare
- Open Source
- Software
Summary of Comments ( 11 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43568503

Hacker News users discussed InitWare, a portable systemd fork, with a mix of skepticism and curiosity. Some questioned the value proposition, given the maturity and ubiquity of systemd, wondering if the project addressed a real need or was a solution in search of a problem. Others expressed concerns about maintaining compatibility across different operating systems and the potential for fragmentation. However, some commenters were intrigued by the possibility of a more lightweight and portable init system, particularly for embedded systems or specialized use cases where systemd might be overkill. Several users also inquired about specific technical details, like the handling of cgroups and service management, demonstrating a genuine interest in the project's approach. The overall sentiment leaned towards cautious observation, with many waiting to see if InitWare could carve out a niche or offer tangible benefits over existing solutions.

The Hacker News post discussing InitWare, a portable systemd fork running on BSDs and Linux, has generated a number of comments, primarily focusing on the motivations behind the project and its potential implications.

Several commenters express skepticism about the value proposition of InitWare. They question the need for another init system, especially one derived from systemd, given the existing options and the controversies surrounding systemd's design philosophy. Some argue that the resources invested in InitWare could be better directed towards improving existing init systems or addressing other needs within the BSD ecosystem. The complexity of systemd is also raised as a concern, with some suggesting that a simpler init system would be more suitable for BSDs.

A recurring theme is the perception of systemd as overly complex and monolithic. Commenters express concern about replicating these perceived flaws in a new project. They suggest that a more modular approach, focusing on interoperability and leveraging existing BSD tools, would be a better strategy.

Some commenters discuss the technical challenges involved in porting systemd to different operating systems, highlighting the potential for inconsistencies and unexpected behavior. They also raise concerns about the long-term maintenance burden of such a project.

There's a discussion about the licensing implications of forking systemd, given its LGPL license. Commenters clarify the requirements of the LGPL and how they apply to InitWare.

A few commenters express interest in the project, appreciating the effort to bring systemd's features to other platforms. They suggest potential use cases and benefits, such as improved containerization support. However, even those expressing interest also voice reservations about the project's overall direction and potential drawbacks.

One commenter questions the naming of the project, suggesting that it might be confused with existing software.

The overall sentiment appears to be predominantly cautious and skeptical, with many commenters expressing concerns about the project's goals and feasibility. While there's some interest in the technical aspects of the porting effort, the majority of comments question the necessity and wisdom of recreating systemd on other operating systems.
Convert Linux to Windows

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-29 21:34:02

The blog post details the author's process of switching from Linux (Pop!_OS, specifically) to Windows 11. Driven by the desire for a better gaming experience and smoother integration with their workflow involving tools like Adobe Creative Suite and DaVinci Resolve, they opted for a clean Windows installation. The author outlines the steps they took, including backing up essential Linux files, creating a Windows installer USB drive, and installing Windows. They also touch on post-installation tasks like driver installation and setting up their development environment with WSL (Windows Subsystem for Linux) to retain access to Linux tools. Ultimately, the post documents a pragmatic approach to switching operating systems, prioritizing software compatibility and performance for the author's specific needs.

The blog post titled "Convert Linux to Windows" details the author, Philip Bohun's, process of migrating his personal computer from a Linux-based operating system (specifically Ubuntu) to Windows 11. He outlines his motivations for the switch, primarily driven by his desire to have a unified development environment that mirrors the setup he uses at work, which is Windows-based. This eliminates the need for constant context switching and the potential inconsistencies that can arise from working across different operating systems. He highlights the challenges he faced in maintaining separate development environments and the benefits he anticipated from streamlining his workflow with a single, consistent OS.

Bohun meticulously describes each step of his conversion process, starting with backing up his essential data from his Linux installation. This backup included not just his personal files, but also configurations for various applications and system settings. He then proceeds to explain how he created bootable Windows 11 installation media using a USB drive. The post includes specific details about the process, including the tools he used and any difficulties encountered.

Following the creation of the installation media, Bohun outlines the steps taken during the Windows 11 installation itself. This includes partitioning the hard drive, selecting the correct drive for installation, and navigating the Windows setup process. He notes any deviations from the standard installation process, such as dealing with pre-existing partitions from his Linux installation. He further explains his approach to setting up his development environment in Windows, including installing essential software like the Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL), Docker Desktop, and Visual Studio. He elaborates on configuring these tools to replicate the functionality he had in his Linux environment.

The post concludes with Bohun's initial impressions of Windows 11 after the switch, highlighting both the positive aspects and any remaining challenges. He discusses his experiences with WSL, comparing it to his native Linux environment and noting any performance differences or compatibility issues. He also reflects on the overall smoothness of the transition and the degree to which his objectives for switching were met. He emphasizes the regained consistency in his development workflow as a key benefit. The overall tone of the post is descriptive and technically oriented, offering a practical guide for others considering a similar migration.
- Linux
- Windows
- Conversion
- Operating System
- Dual Boot
- virtual machine
- WSL
- Migration
- Installation
Summary of Comments ( 368 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43518917

Several commenters on Hacker News express skepticism about the blog post's claim of seamlessly switching from Linux to Windows. Some point out that the author's use case (primarily gaming and web browsing) doesn't necessitate Linux's advantages, making the switch less surprising. Others question the long-term viability of relying on Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) for development, citing potential performance issues and compatibility problems. A few commenters share their own experiences switching between operating systems, with some echoing the author's sentiments and others detailing difficulties they encountered. The overall sentiment leans toward cautious curiosity about WSL's capabilities while remaining unconvinced it's a complete replacement for a native Linux environment for serious development work. Several users suggest the author might switch back to Linux in the future as their needs change.

The Hacker News post "Convert Linux to Windows" with ID 43518917 has several comments discussing the blog post about converting a Linux system to Windows using a method involving dd. Many commenters focus on the potential risks and inefficiencies of this method.

One of the most compelling lines of discussion revolves around the dangers of using dd directly on a system disk. Several users point out the significant risk of data loss if the command is even slightly incorrect. They emphasize that using dd requires extreme caution and a deep understanding of its functionality, as it can easily overwrite critical data if misused. Alternatives like Clonezilla are suggested as safer and more user-friendly options for disk cloning.

Another key point raised is the inefficiency of the proposed method, particularly regarding the resizing of the NTFS partition. Commenters suggest that it's generally more efficient and less error-prone to simply install Windows fresh on the target drive, rather than attempting to convert a Linux partition. They argue that a clean installation avoids potential compatibility issues and ensures optimal performance.

The discussion also touches upon the specific tools and procedures mentioned in the blog post. Some commenters question the necessity of certain steps, while others offer alternative commands or approaches that they believe are more efficient or reliable. For example, the use of gparted for resizing partitions is mentioned as a common and generally reliable method.

Some users also share their personal experiences with similar system conversions, highlighting both successes and failures. These anecdotes provide practical context to the theoretical discussion and reinforce the importance of caution and careful planning when undertaking such tasks.

Finally, a few comments drift slightly off-topic, discussing broader themes related to operating system preferences and the merits of Linux versus Windows. However, the majority of the discussion remains focused on the technical aspects of the conversion process outlined in the blog post.
New Windows 11 build makes mandatory Microsoft sign-in even more mandatory

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-29 15:58:09

Windows 11's latest Insider build further cements the requirement of a Microsoft account for Home and Pro edition users during initial setup. While previous workarounds allowed local account creation, this update eliminates those loopholes, forcing users to sign in with a Microsoft account before accessing the desktop. Microsoft claims this provides a consistent experience across Windows 11 features and devices. However, this change limits user choice and potentially raises privacy concerns for those preferring local accounts. Pro users setting up Windows 11 on their workplace network will be exempt from this requirement, allowing them to directly join Azure Active Directory or Active Directory.

Ars Technica reports on a seemingly incremental, yet potentially significant, change within the latest preview build of Windows 11, specifically build 23466. This alteration further solidifies Microsoft's push towards requiring users to utilize a Microsoft Account for initial setup and usage of certain key features within the operating system, even on Pro editions traditionally offering local account options. Previously, in Windows 11 Pro, users could bypass the Microsoft Account requirement during initial setup by disconnecting from the internet. This workaround effectively forced the OS to default to local account creation due to the unavailability of online account verification.

However, this new build eliminates that workaround. Now, even without an internet connection during setup, certain critical features and settings areas will be inaccessible until a Microsoft Account is connected. The article details that attempting to access areas like personalization settings, Microsoft 365 apps, Windows Store apps, and OneDrive functionality will prompt the user with a screen explicitly requiring Microsoft Account login. This represents a departure from the prior behavior, where these functionalities, while perhaps limited, were still partially accessible with a local account.

This change effectively removes the practical benefits of a local account for many users, as core Windows 11 experiences are now gated behind Microsoft Account authentication. While technically a local account can still be created during setup through the offline method, its utility is significantly diminished. Ars Technica speculates that this change may be part of a broader strategy by Microsoft to increase user engagement with its online services and ecosystem, potentially driven by increasing reliance on cloud-based features and subscription models. The article does not explicitly state Microsoft’s reasoning for the change but highlights the growing trend of operating systems integrating more tightly with online services. This development underscores the ongoing tension between user privacy, local control over operating system functionalities, and the convenience and feature integration offered by cloud-connected services.
Summary of Comments ( 33 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43516482

Hacker News users largely expressed frustration and cynicism towards Microsoft's increased push for mandatory account sign-ins in Windows 11. Several commenters saw this as a continuation of Microsoft's trend of prioritizing advertising revenue and data collection over user experience and privacy. Some discussed workarounds, like using local accounts during initial setup and disabling connected services later, while others lamented the gradual erosion of local account functionality. A few pointed out the irony of Microsoft's stance on user choice given their past criticisms of similar practices by other tech companies. Several commenters suggested that this move further solidified Linux as a preferable alternative for privacy-conscious users.

The Hacker News post titled "New Windows 11 build makes mandatory Microsoft sign-in even more mandatory" has generated a significant number of comments discussing the implications of Microsoft's increasing push for account integration in its operating system.

Several commenters express frustration and concern over the perceived loss of control and privacy. They argue that forcing users to sign in with a Microsoft account for basic functions like setting up a local user account is an overreach and limits user autonomy. Some even suggest that this move is a tactic to gather more user data.

A common point of contention is the inconvenience this change poses for users who prefer local accounts, especially those with multiple devices or who manage devices for others. The additional steps required to bypass the Microsoft account login are seen as unnecessary and time-consuming.

Some users discuss potential workarounds, such as using a dummy account or disconnecting from the internet during setup. However, there is concern that these workarounds might be patched in future updates. The discussion also touches on the possibility of using enterprise versions of Windows or alternative operating systems like Linux as a way to avoid this forced integration.

A few commenters draw parallels to similar practices employed by other tech companies, suggesting a broader trend towards tighter control and data collection within the tech industry. Some express resignation, viewing this as an inevitable progression in the evolution of software.

There's a degree of speculation about Microsoft's motivations behind this change. While data collection is frequently cited, others suggest it could be related to streamlining software distribution, improving security, or pushing users towards Microsoft's cloud services.

Finally, some comments offer a more nuanced perspective, acknowledging potential benefits of account integration while still criticizing the mandatory nature of the implementation. They suggest that offering a seamless experience for users who choose a Microsoft account is acceptable, but forcing it on everyone is a step too far. The overall sentiment appears to be overwhelmingly negative, with many users expressing disappointment and apprehension about the future direction of Windows.
Google will develop Android OS behind closed doors starting next week

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-26 18:01:51

Starting next week, Google will significantly reduce public access to the Android Open Source Project (AOSP) development process. Key parts of the next Android release's development, including platform changes and internal testing, will occur in private. While the source code will eventually be released publicly as usual, the day-to-day development and decision-making will be hidden from the public eye. This shift aims to improve efficiency and reduce early leaks of information about upcoming Android features. Google emphasizes that AOSP will remain open source, and they intend to enhance opportunities for external contributions through other avenues like quarterly platform releases and pre-release program expansions.

In a momentous shift that could reshape the future of the Android operating system, Google has announced its intention to transition the development of Android Open Source Project (AOSP) from its current, predominantly public model to a more closed, internal process. This transition, slated to commence in the week of March 31, 2025, signifies a significant departure from Google's long-standing approach of fostering open collaboration and community involvement in Android's evolution.

While specific details remain somewhat nebulous, the core implication is that a substantial portion of Android's underlying codebase development will now occur behind closed doors, within Google's internal teams. This move raises questions about the extent to which external developers and the wider Android community will be able to contribute to the platform's core functionalities moving forward.

The rationale behind this decision, as outlined by Google, appears to be centered on streamlining the development process and enhancing efficiency. The company suggests that by consolidating development internally, it can mitigate complexities arising from managing contributions from a vast and diverse external community. This, they argue, will facilitate quicker iterations, smoother integration of new features, and potentially a more cohesive overall experience for Android users.

However, this shift also raises concerns about potential impacts on transparency and community involvement. Historically, AOSP has thrived on the contributions of countless developers worldwide, who have played a crucial role in shaping Android into the ubiquitous platform it is today. The move to a more closed development model could restrict this external participation, potentially hindering innovation and limiting the diversity of perspectives that contribute to Android's evolution.

The precise ramifications of this change remain to be seen. Google has indicated that certain aspects of AOSP will remain open, allowing for continued community engagement in specific areas. However, the extent of this continued openness, and the specific mechanisms by which external developers can participate, remain to be clarified. The coming weeks and months will be crucial in understanding how this shift will impact the future trajectory of the Android operating system, and whether the purported benefits of increased efficiency will outweigh the potential drawbacks of reduced community involvement. The broader Android ecosystem, encompassing device manufacturers, app developers, and users alike, will be watching closely as this transition unfolds.
Summary of Comments ( 61 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43484927

Hacker News commenters express concern over Google's move to develop Android AOSP primarily behind closed doors. Several suggest this signals a shift towards prioritizing Pixel features and potentially neglecting the broader Android ecosystem. Some worry this will stifle innovation and community contributions, leading to a more fragmented and less open Android experience. Others speculate this is a cost-cutting measure or a response to security concerns. A few commenters downplay the impact, believing open-source contributions were already minimal and Google's commitment to open source remains, albeit with a different approach. The discussion also touches upon the potential impact on custom ROM development and the future of AOSP's openness.

The Hacker News post "Google will develop Android OS behind closed doors starting next week" (linking to a 9to5Google article about changes in Android AOSP development) generated a significant number of comments discussing the implications of the shift to a more private development process.

Several commenters expressed concern that this change will negatively impact the open-source nature of Android. They argued that less public development means less community involvement, which could lead to slower bug detection, less innovation, and potentially a less secure operating system. Some worried that this move signals a broader shift away from Google's commitment to open source, possibly driven by competitive pressures or a desire for tighter control.

A few commenters drew parallels to other platforms and projects that have adopted similar private development models, speculating on whether Android might follow the same trajectory. Some pointed to the potential for fragmentation within the Android ecosystem if custom ROM development and community contributions are stifled.

Others offered a more nuanced perspective. They acknowledged potential downsides but also suggested that a more closed development process could have benefits, such as improved efficiency, faster release cycles, and better coordination within Google's development teams. Some suggested that Google might still maintain some level of transparency, even if the full development process isn't publicly visible. There was discussion around the distinction between "open source" and truly "open development", with some arguing that Android's open-source nature has been somewhat superficial for a while, given the dominance of Google's own implementations and services.

A recurring theme was the question of what this means for custom ROM development and the wider Android modding community. Some worried that this change will make it significantly harder to build and maintain custom ROMs, limiting user choice and potentially harming innovation. Others were less concerned, pointing out that many custom ROMs are primarily based on AOSP anyway and suggesting that the impact might not be as dramatic as some fear.

Finally, several commenters focused on the security implications of this move. Some argued that less public scrutiny could lead to more vulnerabilities going unnoticed. Others countered that a more controlled development environment might actually enhance security by making it harder for malicious actors to exploit vulnerabilities during the development process.

Overall, the comments reflected a mix of concern, skepticism, and cautious optimism. Many expressed a desire for more clarity from Google about the specifics of this change and its long-term implications for the Android ecosystem.
Debian bookworm live images now reproducible

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-26 17:22:22

Debian's "bookworm" release now offers officially reproducible live images. This means that rebuilding the images from source code will result in bit-for-bit identical outputs, verifying the integrity and build process. This achievement, a first for official Debian live images, was accomplished by addressing various sources of non-determinism within the build system, including timestamps, random numbers, and build paths. This increased transparency and trustworthiness strengthens Debian's security posture.

The Linux Weekly News article, "Debian bookworm live images now reproducible," details a significant milestone achieved by the Debian project: the ability to create bit-for-bit identical live images. This signifies that building a Debian Bookworm live image using the same source code and build process will consistently result in the exact same output, regardless of the time or location of the build. This achievement provides several crucial benefits, enhancing both security and reliability.

Previously, variations in build environments, timestamps, and other seemingly inconsequential factors could lead to subtle, but important, differences between ostensibly identical builds. This made it difficult to verify the integrity of the images and complicated troubleshooting. With reproducible builds, developers and users can now cryptographically verify that a downloaded image is indeed the intended artifact, free from tampering or unintentional corruption. This assurance boosts security by mitigating risks associated with compromised build systems or malicious modifications during the build process.

The article highlights the collaborative efforts involved in achieving this reproducibility, referencing work by the Debian Reproducible Builds project. This group has been instrumental in identifying and eliminating sources of non-determinism within the build process. These efforts involved meticulous examination of build scripts, toolchains, and dependencies, addressing issues such as randomized build paths, embedded timestamps, and variations in locale settings.

The process of making the live images reproducible involved several key technical challenges, including managing differences arising from filesystem creation timestamps and handling variations in the compression of initramfs images. Specifically, the article mentions the utilization of tools like xorriso for ISO image creation and squashfs with consistent compression options to address these challenges.

While the article focuses on the Bookworm release, it acknowledges that this achievement paves the way for reproducible live images in future Debian releases and potentially inspires other distributions to adopt similar practices. This advancement represents a significant step forward in ensuring the integrity and trustworthiness of Debian live images, strengthening the overall security and reliability of the Debian ecosystem. The article concludes by emphasizing the ongoing commitment of the Debian project to reproducible builds and the broader implications of this accomplishment for the open-source community.
Summary of Comments ( 68 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43484520

Hacker News commenters generally expressed approval of Debian's move toward reproducible builds, viewing it as a significant step for security and trust. Some highlighted the practical benefits, like easier verification of image integrity and detection of malicious tampering. Others discussed the technical challenges involved in achieving reproducibility, particularly with factors like timestamps and build environments. A few commenters also touched upon the broader implications for software supply chain security and the potential influence on other distributions. One compelling comment pointed out the difference between "bit-for-bit" reproducibility and the more nuanced "content-addressed" approach Debian is using, clarifying that some variation in non-functional aspects is still acceptable. Another insightful comment mentioned the value of this for embedded systems, where knowing exactly what's running is crucial.

The Hacker News post "Debian bookworm live images now reproducible" sparked a discussion with several insightful comments.

One commenter highlighted the significance of this achievement for security and trust. They explained that reproducible builds allow anyone to verify that a binary corresponds exactly to the claimed source code. This eliminates the risk of malicious code injection during the build process, whether intentional or accidental. This commenter emphasized the importance of this for situations where pre-built binaries are necessary, such as live images, and how this contributes to the overall security posture of Debian.

Another commenter pointed out the impressive effort involved in achieving reproducible builds, considering the complexity of a modern operating system and the potential for variations in build environments. They also expressed hope that other distributions would follow Debian's lead.

One user questioned the practical impact of reproducible builds for average users, prompting a reply explaining the benefits in terms of enhanced security and auditability. The reply clarified that while average users might not directly verify the builds themselves, the availability of reproducible builds allows trusted third parties to perform these verifications, ultimately benefiting all users.

A further comment delved into the technical aspects of reproducibility, mentioning the challenges posed by differences in timestamps and build paths. The commenter acknowledged the efforts made by the Debian project to overcome these challenges, resulting in truly byte-for-byte identical images.

A user familiar with Debian's build process explained the use of sbuild, a tool designed for creating chroot environments that ensure build consistency. They elaborated on how sbuild helps minimize variations in build dependencies and environment variables, contributing significantly to the reproducibility effort.

Finally, a commenter brought up the issue of hardware variations and their potential impact on reproducibility, especially for non-deterministic operations involving floating-point calculations. However, this concern was addressed by another user who clarified that the focus of reproducible builds is on the software itself, ensuring that the same source code always produces the same binary, regardless of the underlying hardware. They conceded that hardware-specific optimizations could still lead to performance differences, but the integrity and verifiability of the software would remain intact. This reinforces the value of reproducible builds in maintaining a secure and trustworthy software supply chain.
Linux kernel 6.14 is a big leap forward in performance and Windows compatibility

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-26 15:54:28

Linux kernel 6.14 delivers significant performance improvements and enhanced Windows compatibility. Key advancements include faster initial setup times, optimized memory management reducing overhead, and improvements to the EXT4 filesystem, boosting I/O performance for everyday tasks. Better support for running Windows games through Proton and Steam Play, stemming from enhanced Direct3 12 support, and improved performance with Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL2) make gaming and cross-platform development smoother. Initial benchmarks show impressive results, particularly for AMD systems. This release signals a notable step forward for Linux in both performance and its ability to seamlessly integrate with Windows environments.

The recently released Linux kernel 6.14 signifies a substantial advancement in both performance and compatibility with Windows, promising a more robust and versatile user experience across various hardware platforms. This new kernel version incorporates a plethora of enhancements and optimizations that contribute to these improvements. On the performance front, notable additions include the introduction of the "Maple Tree" file system, an experimental feature that demonstrates significant potential for enhancing input/output operations, particularly for large files and directories. This translates to faster read and write speeds, ultimately improving system responsiveness and application performance. Furthermore, the kernel integrates improved support for both Intel and AMD processors, capitalizing on their latest architectural advancements to deliver optimized performance for users utilizing these platforms. Specific optimizations for Intel's Sapphire Rapids processors and AMD's Zen 4 architecture are included, ensuring that users of these newer processors can leverage the full extent of their capabilities.

The article emphasizes a considerable stride in Windows compatibility, largely attributed to enhancements within the Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL). These improvements aim to provide a more seamless and integrated experience for users running Linux applications within a Windows environment. Specifically, support for nested virtualization within WSL has been enhanced, enabling users to run virtual machines within their WSL instances, greatly expanding the flexibility and utility of this subsystem. The article also highlights improved graphics support within WSL, allowing for smoother and more performant execution of graphical Linux applications within Windows.

Beyond these major features, Linux kernel 6.14 boasts a multitude of smaller yet impactful changes. These include advancements in the area of networking, with improvements to network drivers and protocols promising enhanced network performance and stability. Support for newer hardware, such as recently released peripherals and devices, is also a key component of this release, ensuring that users can benefit from the latest hardware innovations. The kernel update also includes a series of security patches and bug fixes, addressing known vulnerabilities and enhancing overall system stability and security. Overall, Linux kernel 6.14 represents a significant step forward, offering users tangible improvements in performance, enhanced compatibility with Windows, and a more secure and robust computing experience. Its focus on optimizing both new and existing hardware platforms, coupled with improvements to core system components, positions it as a compelling upgrade for a wide range of Linux users.
Summary of Comments ( 88 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43483567

Hacker News commenters generally express skepticism towards ZDNet's claim of a "big leap forward." Several point out that the article lacks specific benchmarks or evidence to support the performance improvement claims, especially regarding gaming. Some suggest the improvements, while present, are likely incremental and specific to certain hardware or workloads, not a universal boost. Others discuss the ongoing development of mainline Windows drivers for Linux, particularly for newer hardware, and the complexities surrounding secure boot. A few commenters mention specific improvements they appreciate, such as the inclusion of the "rusty-rng" random number generator and enhancements for RISC-V architecture. The overall sentiment is one of cautious optimism tempered by a desire for more concrete data.

The Hacker News post discussing the ZDNet article "Linux kernel 6.14 is a big leap forward in performance and Windows compatibility" has generated several comments, mostly focusing on specific technical aspects and expressing skepticism about the article's broad claims.

Several commenters delve into the specifics mentioned in the article. One points out the significance of the "Initial support for the Intel LAM (Linear Address Masking)" feature for improving security, emphasizing its role in mitigating speculative execution attacks. Another discusses the improvements to the timer system, especially for embedded systems, highlighting the real-world impact of these seemingly minor changes. A further comment focuses on the addition of the "user events" feature, explaining its usefulness in performance analysis by allowing user-space applications to annotate trace events.

Some comments express skepticism towards the article's claim of a "big leap forward." One commenter argues that while the improvements are valuable, they are incremental rather than revolutionary, suggesting the headline is overblown. Another echoes this sentiment, pointing out that kernel development is a continuous process and that significant advancements are usually spread across multiple releases rather than concentrated in one.

A recurring theme in the comments is the discussion around Windows compatibility. Several users express interest in the improvements related to running Windows games on Linux via Wine and Proton. They discuss specific enhancements, such as improved support for Direct3D and better handling of anti-cheat mechanisms. However, some commenters also caution against overhyping these improvements, emphasizing that full compatibility with Windows games remains a complex and ongoing challenge.

Finally, a few comments touch on other related topics. One commenter discusses the benefits of the new kernel for specific hardware platforms, while another mentions the overall trend of Linux kernel development and its impact on the broader tech ecosystem.

In summary, the comments generally acknowledge the value of the improvements introduced in Linux kernel 6.14 but express reservations about characterizing them as a "big leap." The discussion centers around specific technical details, particularly regarding security, performance analysis, and Windows compatibility, with a cautious optimism towards the future of gaming on Linux.
Collapse OS

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-26 14:34:32

Collapse OS is a minimal, highly adaptable operating system designed for a post-apocalyptic scenario where global supply chains have broken down. It aims to be runnable on minimal and easily scavenged hardware, using widely available Z80 processors. Its functionality focuses on essential tasks like bootstrapping other, more complex systems, creating and running simple programs, and interfacing with rudimentary hardware like text terminals and floppy drives. The project anticipates a future where readily available modern hardware and software are no longer accessible, and seeks to provide a digital life raft by relying on robust, easily reproduced technologies.

The "Collapse OS" project, as detailed on its website, posits a scenario of widespread societal collapse due to a hypothetical long-term grid failure, resulting in the unavailability of modern computing infrastructure. It anticipates a world where readily available resources would revert to simpler, more robust technologies akin to those of the late 1970s and early 1980s, a period the project characterizes as the "final stage" of easily repairable and understandable electronic systems. In this post-collapse world, the project envisions a need for a specialized operating system capable of running on minimal and adaptable hardware, facilitating bootstrapping back to a more technologically advanced state.

Collapse OS aims to fill this perceived need by providing a highly adaptable and resilient operating system designed to operate on a variety of readily available, low-resource hardware platforms, primarily Z80-based systems. Its core functions are geared towards enabling the creation and maintenance of essential tools and systems in a resource-constrained environment. These functionalities include running a text editor, assembling programs for Z80 processors and other supported architectures like the 6502 and RISC-V, and facilitating rudimentary networking capabilities. The system is designed to be self-hosting, meaning it can be built and modified using its own tools, ensuring its continued evolution and maintenance even without access to modern development environments.

The project emphasizes simplicity and resilience in its design philosophy. The choice of the Z80 architecture is rooted in its prevalence, relative simplicity, and the continued availability of compatible hardware even in less developed regions. Furthermore, the operating system is designed to be bootable from a variety of storage media, including floppy disks, hard drives, and ROM chips, enhancing its adaptability to diverse hardware configurations. The website outlines the project's goals, technical details of its implementation, and instructions on building and using the system. It also includes documentation on porting the OS to new hardware platforms and contributing to the project’s development. The overarching objective is to provide a robust and adaptable computing platform that can serve as a foundation for rebuilding technological capabilities in a post-collapse scenario.
Summary of Comments ( 59 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43482705

Hacker News users discussing Collapse OS express skepticism about its practicality and usefulness. Many question the likelihood of a societal collapse severe enough to render existing technology useless, while others point out the difficulty of bootstrapping complex technology from salvaged parts in a post-apocalyptic scenario. Some find the project interesting as a thought experiment or a hobby, but doubt its real-world applicability. A few commenters express concerns about the project's potential to attract a "doomer" mentality. The overall sentiment is one of cautious curiosity mixed with significant doubt about the project's premise and viability.

The Hacker News post titled "Collapse OS" with the ID 43482705 sparked a discussion with a variety of viewpoints on the project and its premise.

Several commenters expressed skepticism about the likelihood of a complete societal collapse severe enough to warrant such a specialized operating system. They questioned the practicality and usefulness of Collapse OS in such a scenario, suggesting that focusing on more immediate and probable challenges might be a better use of resources. The idea of maintaining complex technology like a Z80-based system in a true collapse scenario was also met with skepticism. Concerns were raised about the availability of compatible hardware and the ability to manufacture or repair it without existing industrial infrastructure.

Others discussed the more technical aspects of the project. The choice of the Z80 processor was a frequent topic, with some commenters questioning its suitability compared to other potentially more accessible and powerful platforms like the 6502. Discussions around the feasibility of bootstrapping a technological society from scratch using salvaged parts and limited resources also emerged. Some suggested that focusing on simpler, more robust technologies might be more appropriate for a post-collapse environment.

Some commenters, while not necessarily endorsing the premise of total collapse, expressed interest in the project from a hobbyist or educational perspective. They viewed Collapse OS as an intriguing experiment in minimalist computing and a potential platform for learning about low-level programming and hardware interaction.

A few commenters engaged with the philosophical implications of preparing for societal collapse, touching on themes of resilience, self-sufficiency, and the potential dangers of focusing on worst-case scenarios.

While acknowledging the potentially niche nature of the project, some commenters appreciated the creator's effort and vision, viewing Collapse OS as a thought-provoking exploration of alternative technological pathways.

A recurring theme throughout the comments was the importance of community and collaboration in any post-collapse scenario, with several commenters emphasizing the limitations of purely technological solutions and the need for social structures and human connection.
Quadlet: Running Podman containers under systemd

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-24 00:27:05

The blog post introduces "quadlet," a tool simplifying the management of Podman containers under systemd. Quadlet generates systemd unit files for Podman containers, handling complexities like dependencies, port forwarding, volume mounting, and resource limits. This allows users to manage containers using familiar systemd commands like systemctl start, stop, and enable. The tool aims to bridge the gap between Podman's containerization capabilities and systemd's robust service management, offering a more integrated and user-friendly experience for running containers on systems that rely on systemd. It simplifies container lifecycle management by generating unit files that encapsulate container configurations, making them easier to manage and maintain within a systemd environment.

The blog post "Quadlet: Running Podman containers under systemd" by Moritz Warning introduces a new tool called quadlet designed to simplify the management of Podman containers using systemd. The author argues that while Podman excels at managing containers without a daemon, integrating these containers with systemd for functionalities like automatic starting, restarting, and dependency management can be cumbersome using existing methods. These methods, like podman generate systemd, often produce verbose and complex unit files that are difficult to understand and maintain, especially for complex setups involving multiple containers, volumes, and networking configurations.

quadlet aims to address this issue by providing a streamlined approach. It acts as a wrapper around Podman, translating simplified container definitions into robust systemd unit files. These definitions, written in a declarative TOML format, abstract away much of the underlying systemd complexity. The TOML configuration allows users to specify essential container parameters like the image, command, ports, volumes, and resource limits in a concise and readable manner. quadlet then processes this configuration and dynamically generates the necessary systemd unit files, handling the intricacies of container lifecycle management and dependencies.

The blog post provides several examples demonstrating quadlet's usage, including setting up a simple web server, defining dependencies between containers, and configuring volume mounts. These examples highlight the tool's ability to simplify common container management tasks within a systemd environment. The author emphasizes the benefits of using quadlet for improved maintainability and readability of systemd unit files, especially as container deployments grow in complexity. Additionally, the post touches upon quadlet's support for advanced features such as automatic updates of container images and the ability to deploy pods composed of multiple containers, further streamlining the management of containerized applications within a systemd ecosystem. Finally, the author concludes by encouraging community involvement in the project and welcomes contributions and feedback.
Summary of Comments ( 53 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43456934

Hacker News users discussed Quadlet, a tool for running Podman containers under systemd. Several commenters appreciated the simplicity and elegance of the approach, contrasting it favorably with the complexity of Kubernetes for smaller, self-hosted deployments. Some questioned the need for systemd integration, advocating for Podman's built-in restart mechanisms or tools like podman generate systemd. Concerns were raised regarding potential conflicts with other container management tools like Docker and the possibility of unintended consequences from mixing cgroups. The perceived niche appeal of the tool was also mentioned, with some suggesting that its use cases might be limited. A few commenters pointed out potential alternatives or related projects, like using podman-compose or distroless containers. Overall, the reception was mixed, with some praising its streamlined approach while others questioned its necessity and potential complications.

The Hacker News post "Quadlet: Running Podman containers under systemd" sparked a discussion with several insightful comments focusing on the complexities and nuances of container management and system integration.

One commenter questioned the inherent complexity of using Podman with systemd compared to Docker, expressing concern that Podman might be overcomplicating a process that Docker simplifies. They highlighted Docker's ease of use for everyday tasks, suggesting that Podman’s approach might be unnecessarily intricate. This initiated a sub-thread where others clarified the distinction between Docker and Podman, emphasizing Podman's daemonless architecture as a key differentiator and security advantage. They argued that while Docker's daemon simplifies some aspects, it introduces a potential single point of failure and security risk. Podman's design, though perhaps initially more complex, allows for greater flexibility and control, especially in systemd environments.

Another commenter pointed out the existing podman generate systemd command, questioning the necessity of Quadlet. This prompted a response from the author of Quadlet, explaining that the tool addresses limitations of the built-in podman generate systemd functionality, specifically regarding resource limits, security settings, and overall management of more complex container setups. Quadlet, they explained, aims to provide a more comprehensive and robust solution for integrating Podman containers into systemd.

The discussion also touched upon the role of tools like machinectl, with commenters highlighting its capabilities for managing virtual machines and containers, offering an alternative approach to systemd integration. This brought forth a comparison between different container management strategies, with varying opinions on the most suitable approach depending on specific use cases.

Several users expressed appreciation for Quadlet, finding its features valuable for managing Podman containers within a systemd context. They praised its ability to handle more intricate configurations and simplify complex deployments.

Finally, there was a brief exchange on the topic of rootless containers and the implications for systemd integration, further illustrating the depth and breadth of the discussion surrounding container management and system integration in the context of Podman and systemd.
The SeL4 Microkernel: An Introduction [pdf]

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-23 11:09:28

The seL4 microkernel is a highly secure and reliable operating system foundation, formally verified to guarantee functional correctness and security properties. This verification proves that the implementation adheres to its specification, encompassing properties like data integrity and control-flow integrity. Designed for high-performance and real-time embedded systems, seL4's small size and minimal interface facilitate formal analysis and predictable resource usage. Its strong isolation mechanisms enable the construction of robust systems where different components with varying levels of trust can coexist securely, preventing failures in one component from affecting others. The kernel's open-source nature and liberal licensing promote transparency and wider adoption, fostering further research and development in secure systems.

The whitepaper, "The seL4 Microkernel: An Introduction," provides a comprehensive overview of the seL4 microkernel, emphasizing its unique characteristics, particularly its formal verification of functional correctness. The document begins by establishing the context of microkernels in operating system design, highlighting their advantages in terms of reliability, security, and performance predictability compared to monolithic kernels. It explains how microkernels minimize the trusted computing base (TCB) by delegating operating system functionalities to user-level servers, thereby reducing the impact of potential vulnerabilities.

The paper then delves into the specific features of seL4, emphasizing its formal verification, a rigorous mathematical proof guaranteeing that the implementation adheres to its specification. This verification covers the C implementation of the kernel and its binary code, ensuring a strong connection between the high-level design and the executed code. The paper underscores the significance of this formal verification in achieving high assurance and eliminating entire classes of vulnerabilities.

The architecture of seL4 is explored in detail, explaining its core components and their interactions. The concept of capabilities, the fundamental mechanism for access control and inter-process communication, is elucidated. seL4 employs a capability-based system, where every access right is explicitly represented by a capability. This fine-grained control over access rights allows for the construction of highly secure and reliable systems. The paper describes how capabilities are managed, transferred, and revoked, providing a clear understanding of the security model.

Furthermore, the document highlights the performance characteristics of seL4, demonstrating its low overhead and efficient inter-process communication. This efficiency stems from the minimalist design of the kernel and the optimized implementation of the capability system. The paper presents benchmark results comparing seL4 to other microkernels and operating systems, showcasing its competitive performance.

The flexibility and adaptability of seL4 are also addressed, demonstrating its suitability for a wide range of applications, including embedded systems, real-time systems, and high-security environments. The paper discusses various case studies and deployments of seL4, illustrating its practical applicability. It also mentions the open-source nature of the project and the active community supporting its development.

Finally, the paper concludes by summarizing the key features and benefits of seL4, reiterating its significance as a formally verified microkernel that offers high assurance, security, and performance. It also touches upon future research directions and potential advancements in the seL4 ecosystem. The overall tone of the paper is informative and technical, aimed at providing a detailed understanding of the seL4 microkernel and its advantages in the context of modern operating system design.
- seL4
- microkernel
- Operating System
- OS
- Kernel
- Formal Verification
- Security
- Real-time
- Embedded Systems
- high assurance
- L4
- whitepaper
- PDF
Summary of Comments ( 5 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43452185

Hacker News users discussed the seL4 microkernel, focusing on its formal verification and practical applications. Some questioned the real-world impact of the verification, highlighting the potential for vulnerabilities outside the kernel's scope, such as in device drivers or user-space applications. Others praised the project's rigor and considered it a significant achievement in system software. Several comments mentioned the challenges of using microkernels effectively, including the performance overhead of inter-process communication (IPC). Some users also pointed out the limited adoption of microkernels in general, despite their theoretical advantages. There was also interest in seL4's use in specific applications like autonomous vehicles and aerospace.

The Hacker News post linked, titled "The SeL4 Microkernel: An Introduction [pdf]", has a moderate number of comments discussing various aspects of seL4.

Several commenters focus on the real-world applications and adoption of seL4. Some express interest in seeing more widespread use and question why it hasn't become more mainstream. Others point to specific niches where seL4 has found success, such as aerospace and defense, emphasizing its suitability for safety-critical systems due to its formal verification. The difficulty of porting existing software to a microkernel architecture is also mentioned as a potential barrier to wider adoption.

A thread of discussion revolves around the performance characteristics of seL4. Commenters debate the trade-offs between the microkernel approach, often associated with overhead, and the monolithic kernel design. Some highlight seL4's impressive performance benchmarks, while others argue that these benchmarks might not reflect real-world scenarios. The efficiency of inter-process communication (IPC) in seL4 is also a topic of conversation.

The formal verification of seL4 generates significant interest. Commenters discuss the implications of this verification for security and reliability, with some emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between the kernel's formal verification and the security of the overall system built upon it. The limitations and scope of the formal verification are also explored, including the potential for vulnerabilities outside the formally verified components.

Several comments touch upon the development and maintenance of seL4, including its open-source nature, the community involved, and the resources required to work with it. The complexity of the microkernel design and the challenges in developing drivers and other system components are acknowledged.

Finally, some comments compare seL4 to other microkernels and operating systems, discussing their relative strengths and weaknesses. Topics like real-time capabilities, security features, and ease of use are brought up in these comparisons.

Page 1 of 3. next last »

Stories with Tag Operating System

Summary of Comments ( 6 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44047741

Summary of Comments ( 991 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44031385

Summary of Comments ( 2 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44021191

Summary of Comments ( 34 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43972360

Summary of Comments ( 14 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43960577

Summary of Comments ( 5 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43926350

Summary of Comments ( 0 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43886271

Summary of Comments ( 14 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43885478

Summary of Comments ( 1 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43858970

Summary of Comments ( 683 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43852162

Summary of Comments ( 181 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43827214

Summary of Comments ( 63 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43810566

Summary of Comments ( 28 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43803148

Summary of Comments ( 60 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43778081

Summary of Comments ( 48 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43772311

Summary of Comments ( 11 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43669990

Summary of Comments ( 166 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43669185

Summary of Comments ( 37 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43640403

Summary of Comments ( 10 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43628500

Summary of Comments ( 111 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43597778

Summary of Comments ( 10 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43597264

Summary of Comments ( 11 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43568503

Summary of Comments ( 368 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43518917

Summary of Comments ( 33 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43516482

Summary of Comments ( 61 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43484927

Summary of Comments ( 68 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43484520

Summary of Comments ( 88 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43483567

Summary of Comments ( 59 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43482705

Summary of Comments ( 53 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43456934

Summary of Comments ( 5 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43452185

Summary of Comments ( 6 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44047741

Summary of Comments ( 991 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44031385

Summary of Comments ( 2 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44021191

Summary of Comments ( 34 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43972360

Summary of Comments ( 14 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43960577

Summary of Comments ( 5 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43926350

Summary of Comments ( 0 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43886271

Summary of Comments ( 14 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43885478

Summary of Comments ( 1 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43858970

Summary of Comments ( 683 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43852162

Summary of Comments ( 181 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43827214

Summary of Comments ( 63 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43810566

Summary of Comments ( 28 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43803148

Summary of Comments ( 60 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43778081

Summary of Comments ( 48 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43772311

Summary of Comments ( 11 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43669990

Summary of Comments ( 166 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43669185

Summary of Comments ( 37 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43640403

Summary of Comments ( 10 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43628500

Summary of Comments ( 111 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43597778

Summary of Comments ( 10 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43597264

Summary of Comments ( 11 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43568503

Summary of Comments ( 368 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43518917

Summary of Comments ( 33 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43516482

Summary of Comments ( 61 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43484927

Summary of Comments ( 68 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43484520

Summary of Comments ( 88 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43483567

Summary of Comments ( 59 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43482705

Summary of Comments ( 53 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43456934

Summary of Comments ( 5 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43452185