4 ms·
It’s a lightweight Hyper-V VM, just like Windows itself when you turn Hyper-V support on (boots hypervisor first, then the Windows VM in the root or parent part
by chem83 4y ago
It’s a lightweight Hyper-V VM, just like Windows itself when you turn Hyper-V support on (boots hypervisor first, then the Windows VM in the root or parent partition)[0].
But if that’s an issue, WSL1 is still an option.[1] It’s a thin translation layer between Linux kernel calls and NT kernel calls, which was the original concept of subsystem from the early NT days which allowed OS/2 apps to run on top of ntdll.dll.
WSL2 didn’t replace WSL1.
[0] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/hyper-v-on-windows/reference/hyper-v-architecture https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/hyper-v-on-...
[1] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/compare-versions https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/compare-versio...
- pletnes 4y agoIt’s not an issue, in fact as a Linux fan it’s magnificent! However it is not windows so if you want to use it for windows stuff / software development there’s going to be some edge cases, performance penalties and hiccups. So long as you stay inside the WSL2 VM and filesystem it’s fantastic. Also WSL1 was a subsystem in the NT kernel but WSL2 is not like this - it runs a separate Linux kernel, with some convenient integrations. WSL1 never did support all the features - I recall I had to use windows .exe executables for some software packages that do have apt-installable packages.
- ripley12 4y ago> WSL2 didn’t replace WSL1. It kind of did, IMO. You can still use WSL1, but my understanding is that it's a dead end; MS has given up on the translation layer approach. WSL1 will still get bugfixes but it seems pretty clear that WSL2 will get the lion's share of investment going forward.