Why isn’t windows just built on Linux at this point are there reasons for MS to maintain their own kernel? There must be people inside of MS asking this just like how edge is now built on chromium...
The New Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL2) Architecture [video]
91–100 of 111 posts
Re: The New Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL2) Architecture [video]
#92Why would I want to run a proprietary, closed-source implementation of what is supposed to be an open source operating system?
Because things like sleep and hibernate work on Windows?
Re: The New Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL2) Architecture [video]
#93Although many people seem to be receiving the WSL2 news well, I am one of the few that feels that we will be missing something important with this new direction. WSL1 was pushing the boundaries of OS research: - a method for having multiple syscall interfaces in a mainstream OS - processes in WSL1 were real NT processes (even if lacking some of the NTOS environment) - direct integration with the rest of the OS withou…
As described in the Video, they could not keep up with feature parity of syscalls in Linux and some concepts are simply incompatible with the two systems. They reference the concept of open file handles and moving folder structures. I think they found the boundary of OS research in this case, and a better product is using the actual Linux kernel.
> They reference the concept of open file handles and moving folder structures.
I think this comment may have been disingenuous on their part. The reason is that this problem more than likely still exists in WSL2 for the /mnt/c, /mnt/d file systems (i.e. what they used to call "DrvFs" in WSL1).
WSL1 comes with (at least) 2 file systems. "VolFs" which is the file system that they use for the Linux root file system and "DrvFs" which is the file system that they use to access Windows drives (C:, D:, ...).
In WSL1 VolFs was implemented as a layer on top of NTFS, so it comes with all the Windows file system and NTFS baggage. In WSL2 they will replace this file system with a native ext4 formatted partition on a VHD file, thus eliminating the Windows I/O stack (except for READ/WRITE I/O to the VHD file).
My contention is that they could have instead replaced VolFs with a native WSL1 file system that uses a disk partition or VHD as its backend storage, thus eliminating the Windows I/O stack in the same way. They could then have implemented proper Linux file system semantics without any baggage.
> I think they found the boundary of OS research in this case
Unlikely. It would not surprise me if the changes we are seeing are less technical and more political.
Re: The New Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL2) Architecture [video]
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that it requires HyperV it’s running in a manner similar to a VM. That doesn’t require linking and any I/O occurs via the normal channels (CPU interrupts, serial console, etc). This is similar to how running a userland application on Linux doesn’t require the application to be GPL’d because it’s not directly linked to the kernel. While it interacts with the kernel it is not derived from it.
This is fairly classic engineer thinking and what I was referring to in my comment below.. you can wrap a GPL library in its own program, put that program on a separate VM on a separate physical host in a separate physical building, talk to it only over a network interface and your program's resulting interaction with it might still be construed as linking. Similarly, your program might statically link against a GPL'…
I think I agree with your overall understanding. It would be interesting to learn what FSF's position is regarding WSL2.
Re: The New Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL2) Architecture [video]
#95That's all cool, but I just learned you can type an exe into Windows Explorer's address bar to open it in the current directory. MIND BLOWN.
Re: The New Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL2) Architecture [video]
#96Since it uses Hyper-V, does that mean it won't work anymore on the Home editions of Windows 10?
Probably not. But you can get legit Win 10 Pro keys from ebay for like $5
Re: The New Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL2) Architecture [video]
#97Re: The New Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL2) Architecture [video]
#98I'd really like for this to support accelerated graphics - unfortunately I imagine that would require a comprehensive solution to GPU virtualisation at the DirectX level, which would at least need to be implemented in drivers - if not also supported at the hardware level.
Without that, then the main reason that I'd even be using the subsystem - GPU compute - is unavailable, and I'll need to actually boot into Linux if I want to do anything useful.
Re: The New Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL2) Architecture [video]
#99Although many people seem to be receiving the WSL2 news well, I am one of the few that feels that we will be missing something important with this new direction. WSL1 was pushing the boundaries of OS research: - a method for having multiple syscall interfaces in a mainstream OS - processes in WSL1 were real NT processes (even if lacking some of the NTOS environment) - direct integration with the rest of the OS withou…
I agree that WSL1 was a fascinating project. It’s too bad all that work has gone to waste.
Re: The New Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL2) Architecture [video]
#100Although many people seem to be receiving the WSL2 news well, I am one of the few that feels that we will be missing something important with this new direction. WSL1 was pushing the boundaries of OS research: - a method for having multiple syscall interfaces in a mainstream OS - processes in WSL1 were real NT processes (even if lacking some of the NTOS environment) - direct integration with the rest of the OS withou…
> Finally WSL2 will be distributed with Windows which raises some licensing questions (IANAL) if not in the letter of the GPL license at least in spirit. I write GPL'ed software myself and I would be somewhat miffed if I saw my software used in a similar manner (i.e. "via a VM", but still distributed with non-GPL code).
Mere aggregation of non-GPL code with (“distributed with”) GPL code expressly is consistent with the GPL, it is contrary to neither letter nor spirit of the license.