Visual C++ for Linux Development
blogs.msdn.microsoft.com
blogs.msdn.microsoft.com
Issue 1: Visual Studio doesn't pull header files from the target Linux system so Intellisense was useless.
Issue 2: Every time I compiled something or started a debug session, four new sshd processes and a new sftp-server process would start on the target Linux system (Ubuntu 14.04 running in a VM). Eventually I had 16-20 of these processes running and they never exit.
Or do I need to be logged in through a terminal session separately running the executables through that?
We've been asking that question for literally decades.
|-sshd(1017)-+-sshd(5495)---sshd(5561)---bash(5562)
| `-sshd(5595)---sshd(5631)---bash(5632)
When the ssh sessions die, only process 1017 is left.For now I'll have my Windows stuff in Windows and my Linux stuff in my Linux partition. I do look forward to checking out the linux-in-windows (dynamic syscall translation) feature soon though.
They would not need to port all the Windows-specific functionality that has accreted on Visual Studio over the years to become the "new Visual Studio" for developers on all platforms.
I've spent many hours running Publisher in CrossOver Office and never ran into any problems, so this sort of thing is certainly possible for complex apps.
I feel MS is forcefully getting into OSS ground and may damage the freedom we have enjoyed. Anyway I have no interests in anything it's doing. No trust, no anything. I just hope it will not use patent or something it is trying to leverage now to sue anyone it wants later, after all it has deep pockets and it is never an ethical company per se.
But Microsoft must have, over time, tried nearly every single dirty trick in their playbook against Linux/FLOSS, and none of that really worked. Short of taking out a hit on Linus Torvalds, there is little they can do to keep people from using Linux (and even that would not really help).
And in the face of this situation, the attitude at Microsoft now seems to be, "if they are going to run Linux on the server, at least we want them to use our cloud to host those servers, and our development tools for building their applications". They may do so only because they have no other choice, but so what? The olden days where Microsoft utterly dominated the IT landscape or developer tools are gone and unlikely to come back. Microsoft wants to stay relevant, so they go with the flow.
Well, if all these plans to 'embrace Linux' succeed they might come back after all. And what happens after that is anybody's guess.
Microsoft is clearly aiming for a much stronger presence in the server market than what they achieved to date and targeting developers on the systems that build for that server market is a smart move.
And how exactly are they going to do that? The last I checked, I could download a distro that was completely independent of anything related to Microsoft. I could even get something like gNewSense and not deal with any nonfree software. Hell, if I was REALLY dedicated to .NET, I could just fork Rosyln. It's Apache 2.0 license after all.
Seriously, I don't think Microsoft is going to make Windows free and join the FSF anytime, but I think they've recognized that they do need to increase their support on Linux if they want to remain relevant going forward. This is a strategic business decision based on industry trend.
People need to exercise some critical thinking skills here. Microsoft is reacting and responding to industry trends to ensure it remains profitable. Just like every other business out there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend_and_extingui...
Sure, maybe it's different this time ... But usually it isn't.
Seriously, when was the last time Microsoft employed EEE? People have been saying "maybe it's different this time.." for years. I'm getting sick of seeing the "EEE" meme every time Microsoft does something.
1) There's much more to Microsoft's historical bad behavior than EEE.
2) Noone in this sub-thread invoked EEE.
:)
Whether or not EEE was specifically invoked is sort of irrelevant, the implications (trojan horse of Troy) were clear to me.
There have been 3 submissions today about Microsoft and the same EEE trope has been posted multiple times to each one. it adds nothing but noise to the conversation when Microsofts behaviour, especially in the last 3-4 years, has not been terrible.
By responding to a point that hasn't even been raised, you add noise to the conversation. It would have been substantially more useful (and injected signal into the discussion) to address the points that either jblow or ausjke raised.
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2330040/microsoft-c...
Here's a quote from the blog post:
"To be very clear, we are not calling for the government to drop its proposal to use ODF. Nor are we calling for it to use only Open XML. What we are saying is that the government include BOTH Open XML and ODF."
I'm not sure how that's considered "anti-open-document lobbying". Especially since every version of Office from 2007 has had support for ODF.
And you, like many people are overplaying the power Microsoft has in order to play your own game of FUD. They has a lot less power than you realize. How can they even possible extinguish Linux? Even if they somehow make gov't all over the world use Windows server, that won't stop individuals and organizations from using Apache and nginx. Their own compiler for .NET is Apache 2.0 License. What are they going to do? Exercise some copyright law?
There is no clearer sign of ill will towards other participants (not Microsoft!) and no readiness to engage in a civil, fact-based discussion.
And I'm a FreeBSD user...so it's not like I'm against FOSS.
Microsoft finally got their mojo back? They are getting amazing.
And yes, it's all mojo all the time around here these days. :)
No matter what good you believe you're doing, it's just in the end going to be used to extinguish competition.
At least, I hope that's what they have realised :-)
Are you trying to kill me, Microsoft?
[disclosure: MSFT]
Anyway, I'm very interested in how can we leverage Linux tools locally on Windows as part of this.
...What a time to be alive. Did hell freeze over or something?
Hope those guys don't go out of business... They were really helpful
Source: I have written a Nodejs debugger for VS before MS released their NodeTools to the public. If you have a couple of such great tools (VS+v8 or VS+GDB) it is just a matter of time before someone brings them together.
Today we do have a dependency on the Android Tools for Visual StudioHowever, this will not lure me away from PlatformIO and SublimeText, which are perfectly cromulate IoT developer tools ..
There is far too much 'bad aji', if you know what that is .. in the way that Microsoft is handling all of this. You are proving a bitter point, for those of us who have been watching for 30 or so years, which is this: Microsoft is still up to its old tricks.
So, no thanks..
That's not quite what I suspected this meant.
Buuuut, still -- good for you, Microsoft. These are the kinds of changes you need in order to attract developers.
When I read the headline after having read the bit about native linux binaries, I thought "wowsers MS went full linux support!" Still, it's an excellent achievement and it seems clear that they wanted to announce this at the same time. They right-sized the scope of the VC++ work to match what could be accomplished in the time allowed.
I would be thrilled if Microsoft's next move would be to transition to an LLVM/clang based engine underneath VC++. IMO their distinguishing feature for VC++ is not the compiler engine. This would be the kind of lean maneuver that they're trying to steer towards these days.
Is this the sort of thing you are looking for with respect to clang? https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2016/01/20/clang-wit...
We don't have clang support for Linux yet, something we are looking at. Lots to do. :)
Of course, if MS Office was available on Linux, converting regular users would be so much easier... But for the time being, I don't see it happening. It would probably be a lot of work, and the demand probably is not there. Last time I saw any numbers, desktop machines in western Europe ran about 90% Windows, 7-8% OS X, and ~1.5% Linux. So unless porting Office to Linux happens to be trivial (which I doubt), it is not worth the effort at this time. (OTOH, they did port it to iOS and Android, so it cannot be impossible, either.)
Wait, for real?
I hope Microsoft has fixed a few of these things though: http://goldmanosi.blogspot.com/2012/05/visual-studio-is-it-g...