3 ms·

Then run a full linux kernel upon WSL2...

• techntoke 7y ago
  WSL2 isn't out yet, and WSL sucked so much that I imagine WSL 2 won't be much better.
  • als0 7y ago
    > WSL sucked so much that I imagine WSL 2 won't be much better Why does it suck? Is it an issue of compatibility or performance? At least WSL2 will fix the former.
    • techntoke 7y ago
      Again, you are talking about something that isn't even released yet. It sucks because the Linux distros available for it are now outdated, it utilizes a specific outdated kernel, it is extremely slow.. the file system is about 20x slower doing most file-system related tasks. Copy/paste doesn't work well without XLaunch (and then stills sucks). There was never a good terminal for it, and the new one doesn't address if it will provide mouse support for things like Vim, it didn't support Docker. There are many more nuances, but that is just a few. Let's not forget though that Windows package management is the worst out of all the operating systems, so even if you have WSL, you are still going to be suck maintaining a crappy OS using terrible bloated installers that leave files everywhere and a crappy package manager like Chocolatey that is falling further behind repos like AUR and Arch.
      • Dylan16807 7y ago
        > the Linux distros available for it are now outdated That's what apt-get is for. > it utilizes a specific outdated kernel Lots of distros do that. > it is extremely slow.. the file system is about 20x slower doing most file-system related tasks That's a windows problem, not a WSL problem. > There was never a good terminal for it Don't you have the choice of almost all existing windows and linux terminals? How can none of those be good? And normal windows installers have nothing to do with it. The lack of docker support is important, but let's not ignore that they're in the middle of fixing it.