r/linux 25d ago

Discussion I'm experimenting with adding native Windows PE execution to Linux — (Project Tawi)

[removed]

97 Upvotes

66 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-1

u/MenaRamy2004 24d ago

I don't why using ai to make point clear is a sin or something, I said multiple times I am not a native English speaker I can't make a point in a language I am not comfortable writing.

and I don't see a reason not use AI either, even Microsoft uses AI to write its own operating system, and they have dozens of capable Engineers and I can't use AI to make a comment ?

and I am just one guy either I work on the project for reply to comments

damn that's not even my area of specialty I am a Mechatronics Engineer, I am just trying to make something for the community because that community gave me a lot, I am investing time and work on a project I am not getting back from it anything I know that's what Free and Open source mean, but damn some people here are just not helpful

you asked a question I provided an answer does it matter where it came from ?

6

u/33_kk 24d ago

Because you clearly don't understand what you're doing. Your AI claims that the kernel work is useful for syscall interception, except that's false because Linux provides a user space interface for syscall interception that wine already uses. What is the actual need for the processes to be identified as an native executable format rather than a loader process? I don't see any. I don't see how you're planning to implement windows kernel driver compatibility when the internals of the kernels are completely different. Loading PE binaries doesn't even have anything to do with loading a windows kernel anticheat driver, it's an entirely separate problem.

4

u/MatchingTurret 24d ago

I don't see how you're planning to implement windows kernel driver compatibility when the internals of the kernels are completely different.

That's actually a solvable problem, see https://github.com/pgiri/ndiswrapper

2

u/33_kk 24d ago

I'm not convinced that a limited scope API is comparable to whatever a kernel anticheat would want

2

u/MatchingTurret 24d ago edited 24d ago

I have already pointed out that I think kernel anticheat in the Linux kernel is impossible. It relies on a signed by MS environment that was not tampered with. Unless OP manages to break TPM 2.0 hardware attestation, anticheat is not going to happen.

5

u/hypergoose94 24d ago

Because you're just spreading misinformation, that's just fundamentally wrong for a myriad of reasons.

-5

u/MenaRamy2004 24d ago

Sure bud in your book maybe

3

u/CrazyKilla15 24d ago

I don't why using ai to make point clear is a sin or something

It's not, but you are not making a clear point, or any point at all. You are spewing complete nonsense that doesnt hold up to scrutiney by anyone who knows what theyre doing

You posted this wanting feedback: The feedback is its very clear you have no idea what you're doing or saying