As a LAMP developer considering moving to a .Net IIS platform, one of my concerns is the loss of productivity due to lack of shell... Has anyone else had this experience? Is there possibly a Linux shell equivalent for Windows?
Depending on what version of IIS you're considering, I would second lbrandy's recommendation to check out PowerShell. Microsoft is working on a PowerShell provider for IIS (specifically version 7). There is a decent post about this at http://blogs.iis.net/thomad/archive/2008/04/14/iis-7-0-powershell-provider-tech-preview-1.aspx. The upcoming version of PowerShell will also add remoting capabilities so that you can remotely manage machines. PowerShell is quite different from *NIX shells, though, so that is something to consider.
Hope this helps.
Are you asking about Linux shell as in an environment to work in? For that CygWin I think has been around the longest and is pretty robust: http://www.cygwin.com/
A while ago I found a windows port of all the popular linux commands I use (ls, grep, diff) and I simply unzip those to a file, add it to my PATH environment and then can run from there: http://unxutils.sourceforge.net/
Or are you talking about executing shell commands from within your code? If you're in the .NET sphere, there is the Process.Start() method that will give you a lot of options.
Hope this helps!
I assume you don't mean cygwin, right?
How about powershell, then?
If you're referring to simply accessing your IIS server from a remote location, remote desktop generally solves that problem. Assuming your server has a static IP address or a host name you can access from the internet, remote desktop is a simple and relatively secure solution.
Is there a problem with this answer? Now I have negative reputation...
The best way I can think of would be to use Cygwin over an OpenSSH connection.
Here's a document that explains how to do just that:
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/cert/openssh_rdp_vnc.pdf
Remote shell doesn't solve the productivity issue. (It merely makes things possible.)
From what I've heard, everything that the future Microsoft GUI:s do will be possible to do with powershell since the GUI:s use the same API:s as those that are available from powershell.
Personally, I love cygwin but cygwin can not help you manage Microsoft applications.
You might be surprised, however, how powerfull the Windows Scripting Host is when coupled with Window Management Instrumentation. I think IIS is fully manageable with WMI or some COM objects that can be easilly used from a JScript WSH script.
You should make your choice of server platform based on the environment as a whole, and that includes the admin/management interfaces supplied.
I'm afraid that if you don't like the way Windows implements management of IIS, then that's too bad. Having said that, a bit of delving around in the WMI interfaces will generally yield a solution that you should find usable. I used to do quite a bit of WMI scripting (mostly via PowerShell) in order to have a reliable environment rebuild capability.
If you want a Linux shell on Windows, install the Windows Subsystem for Linux on Windows 10 :
The Windows Subsystem for Linux lets developers run a GNU/Linux environment -- including most command-line tools, utilities, and applications -- directly on Windows, unmodified, without the overhead of a traditional virtual machine or dualboot setup.
Related
Before I knew about the remote WSL extension for vscode, I had been using bash in it by selecting it as the default shell from the terminal option. What is the advantage of using remote WSL if all I wanted was to just use bash as the default terminal?
Hi Rohan and welcome to SO!
I'll have a shot at answering this, though someone more knowledgeable might have better insight.
When you load VSCode in windows, it accesses your various PC resources as windows resources. For example your files will be from the windows folder structure. Even if you use WSL bash as your terminal, VSCode is still acting on a windows basis.
If you use the remote WSL extension, it leverages VSCodes separation of UI and Backend by remotely starting a VSCode backend in the WSL layer, and connecting the windows UI to that backend ('remotely' although on the same PC). Due to running the backend in a linux environment, the files are loaded as linux files and handled via the WSL system, rather than normal windows access.
With regard to the question 'What is the advantage?' I would suggest the advantage is that now instead of having a split between VSCode in windows and command line in WSL, you now have both acting in harmony through WSL. It should provide some benefits (especially when WSL2 hits properly and performance increases) around things not messing in a windows manner on files you are trying to use in a linux way, and just make things feel a bit more connected.
However if you're using WSL bash just as a command line replacement and not using it for it's linux goodness (though I don't know if this would be the case), there may be less of an advantage.
It's a stepping stone to switching to devcontainers, which are really neat.
This page might help more, but that's my understanding! https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/remote/wsl
is it possible to execute a command (ex: launching a .bat file located on the remote machine) on a Windows Remote Machine, using a UNIX or Linux Machine ?
Is there something like a scp/ssh mechanism or at least a way to connect to a Windows Machine passing through the network ?
Thanks for your help.
By default, recent Windows versions only support the Remote Desktop protocol. As far as I know, client versions only allow a single user, while server versions with installed Terminal Services allow for multiple simultaneous users.
Windows Server versions also support the Telnet protocol, but the server is disabled by default - it may not even be installed. Therefore you will have to enable it manually. Do you really want to use Telnet of all things, though? Just the security concerns are enough to make it mostly useless.
There is also a version of OpenSSH for Windows, that uses the Cygwin DLL. I have not tried it, but using an SSH implementation from the Unix world does have its appeal (and probably a few disadvantages). See also this.
EDIT:
Recent Windows versions also support the Windows Remote Management system, which allows you to launch an interactive session throuh a bit of trickery.
You may want to try Vandyke VShell.
I am looking for a way in Linux to run a batch script on a remote Windows machine. I already searched some forums and the Internet and found e.g. this question.
It seems that the easiest way so far is using ssh. But do Linux or Windows also offer some built-in tools to solve this problem (something like at-command for Linux-to-Windows)?
Have a look at this. It seems to be the linux counter part to the Windows Sysinternals PsExec tool.
.
Another option is to use ad-hoc services for remote execution, e.g. Nagios NRPE for windows. It is not exactly what the developers had in mind, but it can be (ab)used in this way.
I have decided to go with Subversion for a source control repository for my personal and side projects and I'm now trying to decide what OS to use. Currently my file server for my home network is Windows 7 beta. I'm wondering if I should wipe it and install Windows Server 2008 instead? Basically I'd like to know if there are things I could take advantage with a server OS that I can't with Windows 7. First thing that comes to mind is accessing subversion remotely with a VPN connection.
I'm a .net developer, but have dabbled in Linux a bit so I'm not completely turned off to the idea of an ubuntu or debian server...
I imagine the installation and configuration process might go off with fewer hitches if installed on Linux, just because of the package management, but that's assuming some experience with the package system of $whatever_distro. If you're comfortable with Windows, Subversion works perfectly well on there. I've set it up on both, but prefer the Linux installation process (easier Apache integration, in my view), but I had pre-existing Linux experience.
If you're familiar with Windows, I bet you'll find the installation and configuration process easier there. As others have said, many of the tools are cross-platform.
You can run a Subversion server on Windows or Linux (or whatever) so it really doesn't matter. Pick whichever one you already have and feel most comfortable with. Since you are a Windows developer I see no real reason to toss Linux into the mix though.
If your goal is to minimize the amount of work you put into the maintenance of subversion, go with the OS you are most comfortable with. Many maintenance scripts, and subversion hooks are written and available in perl and python which are available for both windows and linux.
One advantage to the Windows server OSes over their client counterparts is that the client OSes are limited as to the number of inbound connections. If you are going to be the only person working on the repo, this may not make a difference. However, if there are multiple people, then this would be an issue. XP Pro/Vista Ultimate are limited by Microsoft to 10 inbound connections. I cannot speak for Windows 7.
To make life easy, try VisualSVN Server. For personal projects there's no reason to setup a separate server just for SVN.
Windows 7 will be able to host Subversion with no problems whatsoever..
If your file-server is already setup and working under Windows 7, I'd say stick with that.. Adding SVN is no reason to install a new OS
You don't need a server at all to use subversion.
If you've already got a file server on your home network, and you're doing this only for you and your personal projects, just use a subversion client such as TortoiseSVN and create your repository (or repositories) on your file server via network share (or mapped network drive, etc).
I wouldn't recommend this for multi-user setups (unless each has their own repository), but for a single user this is the simplest option. And using this approach, to answer your question, you wouldn't gain anything by switching to a server OS such as Windows Server 2008.
I'd actually recommend going with a hosted Subversion provider instead of setting up Subversion on Windows or getting a second server for that purpose. I work for ProjectLocker, but if you Google "subversion hosting", you'll see there are a number of providers that offer free or reasonably priced solutions. The advantages:
It's a hosting provider's primary job to keep your code safe, secure, and accessible, so they focus on uptime, backups, and security monitoring so you don't have to
You don't have to learn how to be a system administrator or Subversion administrator; several providers have user interfaces that make it easy to manage users and permissions.
Hosting instead of DIY lets you focus on what you actually care about: writing great software
I suggest you take a look at ProjectLocker and some of the other providers and decide which one is right for you. You may decide that doing it yourself is the best option for you, but for many people in your situation, a hosted solution has met their needs.
I've found a few (unfortunately, they are bookmarked at home and I'm at work, so no links), but I was wondering if anyone had any opinions about any of them (love it, hate it, whatever) so I could make a good decision. I think I'm going to use Cygwin for my Unix commands on Windows, but I'm not sure how well that's going to work, so I would love for alternatives and I'm sure there are people out there interested in this who aren't running Cygwin.
These work very well for me: http://unxutils.sourceforge.net/.
Cygwin is not so good on Vista or 64 bit, so I stopped using it a while back.
I use Cygwin, but I have used the Berkley Utilities in the past. They worked well enough, if you are used to DOS and you just want the commands. There are some alternatives listed at TinyApps.
Maybe you could also consider running a command line version of Linux in a virtual machine? Colinux is also an option, but it's immature.
Powershell is what you are looking for, it contains aliases for a lot of UNIX commands and a lot more besides.
John
UnxUtils isn't updated as often and isn't as complete as Cygwin but runs natively just like any other Windows command line utility.
Cygwin acts more like a Linux command line emulator. It does feel pretty clunky but it is easier to port utilities to it and this is more complete than UnxUtils.
I personally don't like Cygwin. It really does seem to be wanting. Unless it has some specific tool you want that only works in Cygwin I'd find native ports.
http://www.activestate.com/Products/activeperl/index.mhtml is a nice Perl package for Windows.
http://www.locate32.net/ - I've always liked locate. Much faster than Grep for finding files by name.
Microsoft distributes a UNIX API compatibility layer for Windows NT-based OSes, as well as many common UNIX command line utilities that run on top of this compatibility layer. Unlike Cygwin, it doesn't sit on top of the Win32 subsystem, but instead interfaces with the NT native APIs directly. It supports features that may be difficult to implement on top of Win32, such as case-sensitive filenames and fork().
The Windows 2K/XP version is called Windows Services for UNIX (SFU). SFU is a free download from Microsoft, and also includes an NFS server and client.
The Windows Vista version is called Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications (SUA). SUA is included in the Enterprise and Ultimate editions of Windows Vista, but does not include any NFS support.
Neither SFU nor SUA include an X server. It is possible (but possibly ironic?) to use the free Cygwin X server with SFU/SUA applications.
The Wikipedia entries on SFU and Interix have more details and history.
Linux/BSD :)
Why vote down this question? It's obviously meant to be tongue in cheek is it worth the voter and the receiver losing rep over? Can't you people leave anything at zero and mark up the answers you want to see float rather than mark down the funny one liners?
In answer to the question I've used Cygwin in the past but always found it clunky and wanting. I don't think it's the tools problem but mine but I have book marked Eric's suggestion of unxutils for when my new windows machine arrives tomorrow.
I use Cygwin alot.
I use it for any mvn commands, find, grep, perl scp and all the other stuff i got used to use all the years I only worked on FreeBSD desktops and servers.
I have my old .vimrc, .zshrc, my .ssh/config and all the other nice stuff. I use rxvt.exe instead of cmd.exe which made all the difference for me! Resize, decent buffer, fonts and so on.
andLinux is a distribution of coLinux, which runs the entire Linux kernel inside Windows (with better performance than a VM). Then, with the help of Xming (an X windows server for Windows), you can have Linux windows mingle along side Windows windows.
With that, pretty much everything Linux-based will just work. You're not limited to just the tools that have been ported to Cygwin, you can apt-get anything you want.
andLinux also includes a few niceties, such as desktop shortcuts to launch Linux apps, a launcher that lives in your tray, and context menu items (right click a text file and you can open it in Kate)
The downsides of andLinux are:
Accessing the Linux filesystem is tricky. You have to set up Samba in both directions.
Connecting to a Linux program from a remote connection is also tricky (but possible)