5 ms·

That does not seem to address the question. WSL2 is a VM with a custom init and graphics implementation, but still a VM. So why WSL2 and not vmware or virtualbo

That does not seem to address the question. WSL2 is a VM with a custom init and graphics implementation, but still a VM. So why WSL2 and not vmware or virtualbox or ... ?

Proven 5y ago
Why Virtualbox or why VMware Fusion?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
qayxc 5y ago
Seamless cross-system access to files and programs. Show me a VM that allows me to access the entire host and client filesystem seamlessly without barriers. WSL allow you to do just that and for that alone it's very useful. You can automate tasks using Windows-only software (compilers, etc.) with Linux userland tools and run both Linux and Windows software without resorting to Wine or similar translation layers that come with their own quirks and drawbacks. Want to test whether your software package works on Linux as well? No problem, just open a terminal and compile on Linux in the same file system without having to deal with shared folders and configurations. That's the major selling point for me.
- Mashimo 5y ago
  > without having to deal with shared folders and configurations. Does that work that easily on WSL2? I thought that was mostly a WSL1 things, and thus I have not upgraded yet.
  - Bayart 5y ago
    WSL2 can still communicate across file-systems, though it's not particularly advised. For that specific task WSL1 is probably faster.
    - nikau 5y ago
      Its fine for most day to day tasks, for example I have a simple "~/d" symlink to my windows "Downloads" folder that I can use to fetch files I've downloaded in windows Chrome.
      - Bayart 5y ago
        It's serviceable for one-offs, but you can't do any really high throughput stuff with that since it's going through a network protocol. For example you really need to keep your git repos on the WSL fs, rather than in the Windows tree. The upside is that they thought about it and Visual Code integration is seamless.
        nikau 5y ago
        Luckily most of my is pretty segregated - either its all on Linux or all on Windows.
mythz 5y ago
WSL2 works seamlessly within the same OS that transparently handles managing the VM. It's better integrated where I use shell scripts in dev projects built using Win dev tools, have both Win command-line and bash open in Windows Terminal, JetBrains IDEs or VS Code. VS Code and Jet Brains also lets you seamlessly open projects in WSL and build with Linux tools, needed for our Ruby Jekyll site.
dboreham 5y ago
It's the same thing but : cheaper, faster, easier.
nikau 5y ago
One killer feature is WSL2 can run windows binaries. I've made an "open" alias to emulate the mac behavour, eg. you run "open fred.docx" inside WSL2 and it will open the document in word. I've also made a "pbcopy" clone, and have a bunch of other scripts that simplify mundane tasks.

That does not seem to address the question. WSL2 is a VM with a custom init and graphics implementation, but still a VM. So why WSL2 and not vmware or virtualbox or ... ?

Proven 5y ago

Why Virtualbox or why VMware Fusion?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

qayxc 5y ago

Seamless cross-system access to files and programs. Show me a VM that allows me to access the entire host and client filesystem seamlessly without barriers. WSL allow you to do just that and for that alone it's very useful. You can automate tasks using Windows-only software (compilers, etc.) with Linux userland tools and run both Linux and Windows software without resorting to Wine or similar translation layers that come with their own quirks and drawbacks. Want to test whether your software package works on Linux as well? No problem, just open a terminal and compile on Linux in the same file system without having to deal with shared folders and configurations. That's the major selling point for me.

Mashimo 5y ago
> without having to deal with shared folders and configurations. Does that work that easily on WSL2? I thought that was mostly a WSL1 things, and thus I have not upgraded yet.
- Bayart 5y ago
  WSL2 can still communicate across file-systems, though it's not particularly advised. For that specific task WSL1 is probably faster.
  - nikau 5y ago
    Its fine for most day to day tasks, for example I have a simple "~/d" symlink to my windows "Downloads" folder that I can use to fetch files I've downloaded in windows Chrome.
    - Bayart 5y ago
      It's serviceable for one-offs, but you can't do any really high throughput stuff with that since it's going through a network protocol. For example you really need to keep your git repos on the WSL fs, rather than in the Windows tree. The upside is that they thought about it and Visual Code integration is seamless.
      - nikau 5y ago
        Luckily most of my is pretty segregated - either its all on Linux or all on Windows.

mythz 5y ago

WSL2 works seamlessly within the same OS that transparently handles managing the VM. It's better integrated where I use shell scripts in dev projects built using Win dev tools, have both Win command-line and bash open in Windows Terminal, JetBrains IDEs or VS Code. VS Code and Jet Brains also lets you seamlessly open projects in WSL and build with Linux tools, needed for our Ruby Jekyll site.

dboreham 5y ago

It's the same thing but : cheaper, faster, easier.

nikau 5y ago

One killer feature is WSL2 can run windows binaries. I've made an "open" alias to emulate the mac behavour, eg. you run "open fred.docx" inside WSL2 and it will open the document in word. I've also made a "pbcopy" clone, and have a bunch of other scripts that simplify mundane tasks.