2 ms·
probably because most "use of bash" in practice rapidly reduces to "use of a subset of the unix toolset" which doesn't exist in the same environment, so -- just
by gjvc 6y ago
probably because most "use of bash" in practice rapidly reduces to "use of a subset of the unix toolset" which doesn't exist in the same environment, so -- just the bash shell itself on its own -- would be like a fish out of water.
- brundolf 6y agoWhat about including a "busybox for windows"? Just the core utilities. Common dev tools like git and node already have command-line versions for Windows that work pretty much the same as the other versions
- xnyan 6y agoWell, now there’s WSL 1 and/or 2 depending on your needs. Once hardware GPU support goes live, there are not a ton of development software that one of those could not handle. If you want to do stuff with the windows os or applications, powershell is actually quite good and offers some real advantages over bash - for example, In powershell everything is an object, no string nonsense like bash.
- brundolf 6y agoWSL 1 attempts to bridge all of the Linux system APIs over to Windows ones. WSL 2 spins up an entire Linux VM. Both come with nontrivial compromises when it comes to interop Powershell seems like it tries to change some things up for the "better", but what I really want is something where a person who's used to Unix can just pop into Windows and hit the ground running with all the basic stuff without having to learn a "new" shell first