Hacker News Reader

Comment by sangnoir | Hacker News Reader

Android can run a full-blown Linux desktop distro in a chroot[0] - so yes, you absolutely can run LibreOffice on stock Android if the mood strikes you. I haven't tried it wine[1], but I don't see why one wouldn't be able to run x86 Wine on x64 Android hardware - it's not an emulator, like it says in the recursive acronym.

0. https://www.reddit.com/r/termux/comments/1e6ahlg/how_do_i_in...

1. Because I don't own x86-64 Android hardware, and it's usually pretty awful (Dell Revue).

View on HN

> Android can run a full-blown Linux desktop distro in a chroot

By that definition, Windows is a Linux, too (with WSLv1).

If you're playing fast and loose and consider a chroot running under a the devices' kernel (that also handles all syscalls directly) to be the same as a hypervisor, then yeah, Windows is approximately a Linux distro by the same loose considerations. Tomato/tomato: hiring a translator is basically speaking the language, right?

On the other hand, if you're a syscall purists and are particular about the dependency on virtualization microprocessor extensions (or the lack thereof), then the stack requiring a hypervisor to run a guest isn't equivalent to the OS it's hosting.

Bottom line is: if you have a shell access/ a terminal emulator on stock Android, you can configure it to run a desktop Linux using the kernel loaded on the device without installing am emulator or hypervisor. To me, this is materially different to WSL or ChromeOS' crostini.

WSL1 doesn't use any virtualization. The windows kernel loads a module that implements linux-compatible syscalls, and WSL1 processes are flagged so that syscalls go to that module.

The module that translates[1] Linux syscalls? That module?

Can I say I'm fluent in Tagalog with the help of my "English Subsystem for Tagalog v1" (aka a hired translator)?

1. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/shows/seth-juarez/windows-...

I'm not sure what you're trying to imply with your first line. Because your earlier post did have a mention of translation, but you also said it used virtualization and hypervisors.

WSL1 does translate many syscalls. Others it implements itself. It does not virtualize or hypervize. It does not emulate linux. WSL2 emulates/virtualizes/hypervizes, but WSL1 and WSL2 use completely different technology stacks at their core.

The translator is running inside the kernel as a driver.

If your company hires someone to speak tagalog, they become part of the company, and your company now speaks tagalog.

Windows supports linux binaries in the same way that it supports flash drives.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com