3 ms·

I was excited when I heard about WSL. Of course I found the name confusing, Windows Subsystem for Linux, isn't it a Linux Subsystem for Windows? Then I realize

I was excited when I heard about WSL. Of course I found the name confusing, Windows Subsystem for Linux, isn't it a Linux Subsystem for Windows? Then I realized that the COM ports are not routed into WSL. I need USB-to-RS232 converters to interface with our hardware. Of course, there is a web of contradictory blog posts and announcements when that feature will be finished - one post stating if I upgrade to Creators Update MVP Edition 120394782034785023845 Build 23904782390475 or later, I can use the feature! It took me 1h to find out what version and build of Windows I had, and 1 hour to install the new Creators Update, and 1h to reinstall WSL - and guess what, the feature was absent. What a clusterfuck.

exikyut 8y ago
I think MS is trying to both support and not-support WSL, in the sense of building it out enough to support their internal agenda, but not where complex SLAs are needed. So, COM port access... I don't see that being hard; I envision it as boring API-wiring, since RS232 has been standard since before Windows and Linux existed, so it's likely the code's generally similar. But in terms of high-level support, RS232 is primarily industrial-class, with a long tail of developers and workstation uses trailing after it. Industrial immediately means complex SLAs and - nooooo - industry certifications and the like. I don't think MS wants to invest that much into WSL. With this said, a bit of poking around found https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/wsl/2017/04/14/serial-support-on-the-windows-subsystem-for-linux/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/wsl/2017/04/14/serial-suppo..., from last year. Are you on Insider Build #16176 or later?