4 ms·

"Windows Subsystem for Linux 2 (WSL 2) is the next version of WSL and is based on a Linux 4.19 kernel shipping in Windows" Unfortunately the link https://aka.m

"Windows Subsystem for Linux 2 (WSL 2) is the next version of WSL and is based on a Linux 4.19 kernel shipping in Windows" Unfortunately the link https://aka.ms/build2019kernelannounce https://aka.ms/build2019kernelannounce doesn't seem to work for me.

stefan_ 7y ago
Does that mean they are giving up on the syscall emulation thing? The whole thing of WSL was it that contained no Linux kernel at all.
- naikrovek 7y ago
  It means the opposite. Today, Linux Docker containers on Windows rely on a VM running on Hyper-V. Tomorrow (by which I mean "in the future," or "June 2019" or whatever the announcement says) Linux Docker containers on Windows will run natively, without the Linux VM crutch. I am assuming that it will use the emulated syscalls the same way that WSL runs today.
  - temac 7y ago
    Not sure about that, except if their phrasing is astonishingly poor, which is of course possible. I mean, in my book "Linux 4.19 kernel shipping in Windows" means a Linux kernel shipping in Windows, and that would need Hyper-V (Linux is trademarked btw, MS can't just pretend that they ship a Linux kernel if they don't). At the same time, I really hope that this is not the case and that it actually means that they are targeting a syscall compatibility with Linux version 4.19; because I'm certainly not gonna give up my third party VMs for some work, so if WSL is rebased on Hyper-V that means bye-bye WSL for me.
    - naikrovek 7y ago
      Rewriting WSL to suddenly require a VM would be a HUGE leap backwards and I can't see that being the solution chosen. It doesn't make sense. Adding the appropriate things to WSL to make Docker for Windows no longer require the Moby VM, or to support Linux Docker within the WSL environment without modification, is an approach that makes much more sense to me.
      - mattnewport 7y ago
        It appears that is what they have done though: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/shipping-a-linux-kernel-with-windows/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/shipping-a-linux-...
        naikrovek 7y ago
        Show me where in that article it says that a VM is required. Am I interpreting you incorrectly?
        mattnewport 7y ago
        This article was linked from another article which I guess is where I saw the VM info: > WSL 2 uses the latest and greatest in virtualization technology to run its Linux kernel inside of a lightweight utility virtual machine (VM). However, WSL 2 will NOT be a traditional VM experience. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/announcing-wsl-2/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/announcing-wsl-2/
  - wmf 7y ago
    WSL 2 is a (lightweight magic) VM.
- coldacid 7y ago
  My guess is that they mean that they will fully support the syscall surface of Linux 4.19. I highly doubt that they're actually going to include the kernel inside Windows due to the GPL licensing, the linking issues would force open far more than even Nadella would like.
nikeee 7y ago
Does that mean one can mount ext drives now?

stefan_ 7y ago

Does that mean they are giving up on the syscall emulation thing? The whole thing of WSL was it that contained no Linux kernel at all.

naikrovek 7y ago
It means the opposite. Today, Linux Docker containers on Windows rely on a VM running on Hyper-V. Tomorrow (by which I mean "in the future," or "June 2019" or whatever the announcement says) Linux Docker containers on Windows will run natively, without the Linux VM crutch. I am assuming that it will use the emulated syscalls the same way that WSL runs today.
- temac 7y ago
  Not sure about that, except if their phrasing is astonishingly poor, which is of course possible. I mean, in my book "Linux 4.19 kernel shipping in Windows" means a Linux kernel shipping in Windows, and that would need Hyper-V (Linux is trademarked btw, MS can't just pretend that they ship a Linux kernel if they don't). At the same time, I really hope that this is not the case and that it actually means that they are targeting a syscall compatibility with Linux version 4.19; because I'm certainly not gonna give up my third party VMs for some work, so if WSL is rebased on Hyper-V that means bye-bye WSL for me.
  - naikrovek 7y ago
    Rewriting WSL to suddenly require a VM would be a HUGE leap backwards and I can't see that being the solution chosen. It doesn't make sense. Adding the appropriate things to WSL to make Docker for Windows no longer require the Moby VM, or to support Linux Docker within the WSL environment without modification, is an approach that makes much more sense to me.
    - mattnewport 7y ago
      It appears that is what they have done though: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/shipping-a-linux-kernel-with-windows/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/shipping-a-linux-...
      - naikrovek 7y ago
        Show me where in that article it says that a VM is required. Am I interpreting you incorrectly?
        mattnewport 7y ago
        This article was linked from another article which I guess is where I saw the VM info: > WSL 2 uses the latest and greatest in virtualization technology to run its Linux kernel inside of a lightweight utility virtual machine (VM). However, WSL 2 will NOT be a traditional VM experience. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/announcing-wsl-2/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/announcing-wsl-2/
- wmf 7y ago
  WSL 2 is a (lightweight magic) VM.
coldacid 7y ago
My guess is that they mean that they will fully support the syscall surface of Linux 4.19. I highly doubt that they're actually going to include the kernel inside Windows due to the GPL licensing, the linking issues would force open far more than even Nadella would like.

nikeee 7y ago

Does that mean one can mount ext drives now?