Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Testing the Windows Subsystem for Linux

blogs.msdn.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 142 posts

Re: Testing the Windows Subsystem for Linux

#91

Post by stirner »

ryenus wrote: post #87
ape4 wrote: post #2

I still have a hard time with bash-backwards name: "Windows Subsystem for Linux". Its a Linux subsystem for Windows.

"Windows Subsystem for Linux", though a confusing name, is still better than "Linux On Windows", because the later would lead to LOW, which is unfortunately very true, in terms of performance, they just don't want you to ever think in that way. Edit: seriously, I'm just kidding

Have you compared benchmarks of any of your programs on native Windows and WSL? I've actually seen better performance on WSL in many cases.

Re: Testing the Windows Subsystem for Linux

#92

Post by mkl »

SwellJoe wrote: post #53
2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #40

Does anyone use this for work? Could I replace Ubuntu with Windows now?

I used it for a while, when Fedora 24 refused to work reliably on my 4k laptop (it worked under 23, and now works again under 25). It was OK. I mean, it's an amazing feat of engineering, but there's a ton of little (and not so little) quirks that made it painful. Sharing files across the two systems was (maybe still is?) disastrous. I've heard of total Linux system corruption, but I personally had files disappear (th…

> Sharing files across the two systems was (maybe still is?) disastrous.

I don't think this has ever been true. Just don't jump through the hoops it takes to modify Linux system files from Windows - that stuff is hidden from Windows apps for good reason.

If you need to access files from both, store them in a normal Windows place like "/mnt/c/...". E.g. in my WSL home directory I have symlinks to my Windows Documents, Downloads, Development, etc. folders. I constantly operate on the same files from both OSes simultaneously, and it's fine.

Re: Testing the Windows Subsystem for Linux

#94

Post by simonh »

greglindahl wrote: post #38
hdhzy wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but names starting with a trademark are a no-no. See [0] (bitcrazed works on WSL) and [1]. Also IANAL. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13697918 [1]: https://www.andreas-jung.com/contents/dont-use-docker-in-git...

I thought that both "Windows" and "Linux" were trademarks?

Since they are saying it is 'for Linux' rather than it is Linux, I suppose they are probably ok, although the system doesn't contain or even work with any parts of Linux itself in any way.

Re: Testing the Windows Subsystem for Linux

#96

Post by camtarn »

Zyst wrote: post #49

Is anyone here using this for *Nix traditional tools? Mostly curious about Vim/Tmux, and having serve operations spit out the server into the actual Windows browser? I did read something about the creator update adding 24 color support.

Yep - Vim, working on python code. It's pretty darn good. The terminal occasionally gets confused when you're popping in and out of an alternate-screen app (less or vim) and leaves the bottom line of the alt screen behind - but this can be fixed by hitting ctrl-L. Also the terminal occasionally seems to report the wrong size and vim pops up only using some of the available space - again, suspend vim, ctrl-L, unsuspend, done.

Re: Testing the Windows Subsystem for Linux

#97

Post by skrause »

cryptarch wrote: post #90
kelnos wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The interesting bit of WSL (what the article talks about) is a Linux syscall translation/emulation layer, as well as ELF64 binary support (not specific to Linux, but not specific to GNU either). You can certainly install the Linux versions/ports of GNU tools and run them under WSL, and that's what the stock setup looks like, but an important component of WSL is about emulating a Linux (the kernel) environment. If MS…

I think it is more significant from a user's perspective that they get the GNU tools to run on their NT machine with MS support. What's the use of Linux syscall -> NT syscall translation if not compatibility with developer tools, most of which are GNU software?

So you were actually serious? I thought your first post was great satire. Poe's law strikes again...

Re: Testing the Windows Subsystem for Linux

#98

Post by DavidTWco »

Zyst wrote: post #49

Is anyone here using this for *Nix traditional tools? Mostly curious about Vim/Tmux, and having serve operations spit out the server into the actual Windows browser? I did read something about the creator update adding 24 color support.

I work in Vim and tmux in WSL all the time and it works great for me. In fact, the only tool I've found that doesn't work (on the latest slow ring) is vim-plug.

> having serve operations spit out the server into the actual Windows browser?

I'm unsure exactly what you mean. But you can absolutely run web servers in WSL and connect to them from any browser running on Windows.

In my experience, you can connect to any network services running on Windows from Linux (for example, I connect to the Docker for Windows daemon) and vice versa.

Re: Testing the Windows Subsystem for Linux

#99

Post by adolfojp »

nrki wrote: post #81

Recently tried to use WSL to do some pair-coding tests in an interview, with screen & tmux. The damned terminal kept making characters disappear! I actually thought my interviewer was inadvertently deleting characters, or maybe trolling me. I had to switch to using an actual Linux system. MS have a ways to go before getting this right. I daresay I'll be on OSX by the time that happens though.

Did you try using WSL with the creator's update? The fixes were extensive.

Re: Testing the Windows Subsystem for Linux

#100

Post by skrebbel »

cryptarch wrote: post #90
kelnos wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The interesting bit of WSL (what the article talks about) is a Linux syscall translation/emulation layer, as well as ELF64 binary support (not specific to Linux, but not specific to GNU either). You can certainly install the Linux versions/ports of GNU tools and run them under WSL, and that's what the stock setup looks like, but an important component of WSL is about emulating a Linux (the kernel) environment. If MS…

I think it is more significant from a user's perspective that they get the GNU tools to run on their NT machine with MS support. What's the use of Linux syscall -> NT syscall translation if not compatibility with developer tools, most of which are GNU software?

> developer tools, most of which are GNU software?

such as python, nodejs, elixir and PHP?

Post reply on HN