3 ms·
Can we talk about NT picoprocesses? Up until this feature was added, processes in NT were quite heavyweight: new processes would get a bunch of the NT runtime
by rkagerer 2y ago
Can we talk about NT picoprocesses?
Up until this feature was added, processes in NT were quite heavyweight: new processes would get a bunch of the NT runtime libraries mapped in their address space at startup time. In a picoprocess, the process has minimal ties to the Windows architecture, and this is used to implement Linux-compatible processes in WSL 1.
They sound like an extremely useful construct.
Also, WSL 2 always felt like a "cheat" to me... is anyone else disappointed they went full-on VM and abandoned the original approach? Did small file performance ever get adequately addressed?
- tjoff 2y agoI'm surprised they didn't go the WSL2 route from the start. Seems much easier to do. But WSL is so cool and since I mostly run windows in VMs without nested virtualization support I've pretty much only used that one and am super thankful for it.
- torginus 2y agoHonestly, before WSL 1 was a thing, Cygwin already existed, and it was good enough for most people.
- tjoff 2y agoCygwin is capable but I feel WSL is a total game changer.
- netbsdusers 2y agoI think (but am not sure) that WSL was a consolation prize of the cancelled Project Astoria, the initiative from the dying days of Windows Phone to support running Android apps on Windows. Implementing this with virtualisation would have been more painful and less practical on the smartphones of the day.
- lproven 2y ago> Also, WSL 2 always felt like a "cheat" to me... is anyone else disappointed they went full-on VM and abandoned the original approach? Oh yes, some of us are. This was a decent look: https://jmmv.dev/2020/11/wsl-lost-potential.html https://jmmv.dev/2020/11/wsl-lost-potential.html HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25154300 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25154300