Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 20th Dec 2017 17:34 UTC
Windows

Support for the unix socket has existed both in BSD and Linux for the longest time, but, not on Windows. On Windows, there were some alternatives for local IPC, such as named pipes. But, calling conventions are different between the named pipes and sockets, making writing low-maintenance cross-platform applications difficult. For example, one such place where these two constructs differ (other than the API) is terminating the connection. BSD Socket API provides a bidirectional close semantics using 'shutdown'. There is no direct equivalent of that in named pipes. Such differences make it difficult to port unix socket applications from Linux to Windows and vice versa; up until now!

Build 17063 brings native support for the unix socket to Windows. Starting this build, two Win32 processes can use the AF_UNIX address family over Winsock API (which is very similar to the BSD socket API) to communicate with each other. Currently, the support only exists for the stream (SOCK_STREAM) socket type, which is a connection-oriented protocol for one-to-one communication. Support for the datagram (SOCK_DGRAM) can be considered in future depending on the adoption, feedback and scenarios.

Another step to make Windows friendlier to UNIX/Linux users and developers.

Permalink for comment 652333
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Target Audience
by Alfman on Fri 22nd Dec 2017 13:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Target Audience"
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

kwan_e,

But if your stuff runs in a cloud and suddenly there's a way of easily trying out Azure, then that would lure people in, because it wouldn't feel like you're replacing Linux but just choosing a different cloud provider.


Yes, but even if it were no compatibility issues and it could 100% replace linux, why would I want to do that? Given microsoft's history as a penchant for user control with a predilection for anti-competitive behavior, I see absolutely no reason for anyone to go that route given the numerous options available in linux hosting.

Admittedly, I am probably biased due to the fact that I sell linux hosting myself, but I really prefer supporting companies that have a larger incentive to work for me than exploit their power over me, as is often the case with huge companies.

Reply Parent Score: 1