Apt for Windows

[Lavene]

Imaging an apt-get port for Windows. Is this the start of the revolution?
/.

Tina

[Pobega]

I don't think it would work. I mean, Windows .exe files are a lot less flexible than .deb files are. For every package installed with apt-get you'd have to run through an installer, and that would defeat the point of a quick package manager.

[hcgtv]

Pretty soon we won't know what we're running.

http://www.openlina.com/

[Simpatico]

Yes, if not for netcraft.

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?sit ... ina.com%2F

[AgenT]

Add the following into your .bashrc, assuming /media/windows is your windows partition:

Code: Select all

alias apt-windows='su -c "mount /media/windows/ && rm /media/windows/ -rf; echo 'virus deleted!'"

Mod edit: Don't try this at home kids!
Example:

Code: Select all

$ apt-windows
Password:
virus deleted!
$

[Dynamite]

Definitely the next step. Microsoft implement locked sources.list pointing to their repositories, then installations goes something like:

sudo apt-get install notepad
password:
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done

The following NEW packages will be installed
notepad
0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 120.5kbB/120.5kB of archives.

This package is marked at: $10 USD.
credit card #:

Funds deducted!

Setting up notepad (2.0.25) ...

Error 1: WGA on package 'notepad' failed! Restart 3 times, spin in a circle, re-purchase and try again!

The way forward.

[AgenT]

Thank you anonymous moderator (Lavene?) for editing my post above with the warning. I forgot to write one myself.

That GNU/Linux emulator should be called, after the Windows emulator, Wino.

[swirling_vortex]

Add the following into your .bashrc, assuming /media/windows is your windows partition:

Code: Select all

alias apt-windows='su -c "mount /media/windows/ && rm /media/windows/ -rf; echo 'virus deleted!'"

Mod edit: Don't try this at home kids!
Example:

Code: Select all

$ apt-windows
Password:
virus deleted!
$

haha that's the best! However, you forgot about adding Windows to your fstab first.

[chrismortimore]

APT for Windows is just cruel. What did APT do to deserve that?

And I'd make one slight modification to that command:

Code: Select all

mount /media/windows/ && rm -fr /media/windows/ && debootstrap etch /media/windows/ ftp://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian/

Disclaimer: Don't try this on your computer, but on someone elses it'll be ok

[AgenT]

haha that's the best! However, you forgot about adding Windows to your fstab first.

I assumed that whoever had an existing windows partition would already have it in their fstab.

And in terms of adding debootstrap: why? Assuming you can already run deboostrap, rm, and mount means that you already have GNU/Linux installed. Unless you are running from a LiveCD/DVD/USB that is.

In truth, for all those Windows users there is already a working way to install Debian GNU/Linux:
http://goodbye-microsoft.com/

[chrismortimore]

And in terms of adding debootstrap: why? Assuming you can already run deboostrap, rm, and mount means that you already have GNU/Linux installed.

One installation for every day use, one for experimentation

[AgenT]

Something like OpenLina already exists: andLinux.

[dmn_clown]

I think a better idea would be an installer/updater for Windows that doesn't need to be rebooted 20* times during the installation process... Or is that just not a part of Windows "ease of use?"

* not an exaggeration, I recently had to re-install XP for someone and kept track of all the reboots.

[GMouse]

In truth, for all those Windows users there is already a working way to install Debian GNU/Linux:
http://goodbye-microsoft.com/

Whoa. That's interesting. I'm trying to figure out exactly how it works.

Edit: Looking at the site, it appears to be geared for Windows users wanting to jump ship. The only problem is that the "more information" link, the first place that such a user still a little uncertain about making this change will go, is geared for people already in the fold. There needs to be a link to information specifically geared to the user who wants to get rid of MS Windows, but is still a little uncertain what this "Linux" thing is and what these "Operating Systems" do, exactly.

[plugwash]

Whoa. That's interesting. I'm trying to figure out exactly how it works.

afaict it downloads the debian installer kernel and initrd (the same ones used for netboot installs) and then uses either loadlin or grub for windows (depending on the windows version) to boot the machine into the debian isntaller.

from there its just like any other debian install.

[synx]

If we made an apt for Windows, of course it would not support .exe files! It would support .deb files, for the Microsoft distribution. .deb files aren't platform specific, or at least they could pretty easily be made to conform to a MS filesystem. apt for Windows doesn't need to support .exe or .msi installers, because that isn't supported even on Debian. Take the nVidia video drivers for instance. There is an nvdia-driver package for Debian, a .deb file that is not an executable in any way, and then there is a self executing installer you can get from the nVidia company. apt doesn't know a darn thing about the installer that the company made, which is just a tarball prepended with a bash extract and run script. Instead, human beings, real programmers took that company's installer, and converted it laborously into a .deb package. Every such 3rd party installation method must be standardized into .deb before apt will track it at all, regardless of whether you're on Debian or Microsoft operating systems.

So basically, you'd take the "GTK for Windows blah" installer, install it into a sandbox maybe, then package those files into a .deb. If you wanted to make a Pidgin .deb for Windows, someone could compile Pidgin against the GTK .deb file that was installed, then sandbox Pidgin itself into a .deb, recording the GTK dependancy, and any others too. In the same fashion that we build .deb files for our Debian distributions, a heroic band of misfit adventurers would have to build .deb files for their Microsoft distribution. And yes, MS is free to build .deb files too if they like. It's inclusive, not all-encompassing.

Among other things, my kernel is the vanilla .tar.bz2 kernel source compiled. Others prefer to use the kernel-source .deb package, but I have the option to eschew that, and take care of dependancies to the kernel manually. You don't have to make it so apt can understand the kernel tarball compile and install system. You only have to provide .deb packages that were made from that tarball at some point in time, with whatever compile options you think are best in general. Sure you could write a script like dpkg-buildpackage that will start the process of turning a tarball into a full fledged .deb package, but it's not necessary.

[domecq]

If we made an apt for Windows, of course it would not support .exe files! It would support .deb files, for the Microsoft distribution. .deb files aren't platform specific

I am sorry to disagree with you there because apt was successfully ported to Red Hat years ago by a developer from Conectiva (*). That means that apt for Red Hat supports another format, i.e .rpm files.

I am not saying that, for this reason, apt could support .exe files. I am merely disagreeing with you in what you said about apt dealing only with .deb files, since it's proved that apt could deal with .rpm files too.

Cheers,

domecq

(*) a Brazilian distribution that was acquired by French distribution Mandrake, which changed its name to Mandriva.

[AgenT]

I think you guys are taking this too seriously. Cheer up and rm -rf something (a windows partition preferably).

[synx]

I am not saying that, for this reason, apt could support .exe files. I am merely disagreeing with you in what you said about apt dealing only with .deb files, since it's proved that apt could deal with .rpm files too.

Oh I didn't know that, sorry. Well okay, apparantly some versions of apt can use rpm, not just dpkg. I learned a bit about this since my last post, and I think I understand now. apt is for inter-package stuff, like following dependancies or finding package mirrors. rpm is for .rpm style package files. dpkg is for .deb style package files. Unfortunately since neither .exe or .msi have any way to tell the dependancies, list installed files, or know anything about the package at all before installing it (if it really is an installer), then there can't be a package thing for the normal Windows installer files, for apt to use.

[alleluia20]

Tina, you missed the copyright. It is already invented: http://windows-get.sourceforge.net/

You have to think of other things. What about a kernel for Windows?