4 ms·
AFAIK This is not emulation or virtualization, so as long as Microsoft's implementation of the Linux kernel APIs on top of the Windows kernel is performant, and
by TheCoreh 10y ago
AFAIK This is not emulation or virtualization, so as long as Microsoft's implementation of the Linux kernel APIs on top of the Windows kernel is performant, and the X11 implementation is also performant, this should have native performance.
Also considering the state of graphics drivers on GNU/Linux and on Windows, it wouldn't surprise me if for some specific hardware configurations, the “perceived interactive performance“ (responsiveness) of the UI was actually higher on Ubuntu for Windows than on it running on top of the Linux kernel.
- loeg 10y agoIt is syscall-level emulation. Emulation in this case doesn't mean it has to be slow. I am curious how they implemented `fork(2)`, though.
- vertex-four 10y agoSurprisingly, the NT kernel implements a copy-on-write fork function - the Windows subsystem does not allow Windows applications to use that function, though. Bash for Windows is implemented as a separate subsystem from Windows on top of the NT kernel, allowing it to build its own abstractions on top of the kernel.
- gruez 10y agoAFAIK the nt kernel already has support for forking.
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y agoNT has support for POSIX-style forking, because it needed it in order to have a POSIX subsystem in the 1990s.