Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Thursday November 24, @07:33AM   Printer-friendly
from the how-did-we-live-without-it dept.

The Windows Subsystem for Linux in the Microsoft Store is now generally available on Windows 10 and 11

Let the fantastical news be proclaimed that will cause cheers of joy to be heard across soylent land!

Today the Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) in the Microsoft Store is dropping its "Preview" label and becomes generally available with our latest release! We are also making the Store version of WSL the default for new users who run wsl --install and easily upgradeable by running wsl --update for existing users. Using the Store version of WSL allows you to get updates to WSL much faster compared to when it was a Windows component.

In response to the WSL community's requests, WSL in the Store will now also be available on Windows 10 in addition to Windows 11. So, Windows 10 users will also be able to enjoy all of the latest features for WSL including systemd and Linux GUI app support!

I notice there is not a wsl -remove option. I don't know what I would have done if they didn't include systemd support.


Original Submission

 
This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only. Log in and try again!
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by psa on Thursday November 24, @09:28AM (7 children)

    by psa (220) on Thursday November 24, @09:28AM (#1281436) Homepage

    We used to say that those who didn't understand Unix were doomed to recreate it, poorly. What we didn't know what that linux was going to re-implement a non-modular, massively centralized OS layer like Microsoft used. Systemd on Microsoft Windows just brings it full circle.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Insightful=4, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2) by choose another one on Thursday November 24, @12:21PM (2 children)

    by choose another one (515) Subscriber Badge on Thursday November 24, @12:21PM (#1281452)

    > What we didn't know what that linux was going to re-implement a non-modular, massively centralized OS layer like Microsoft used

    Er, pretty sure Tanenbaum knew, and said so, just few believed or understood him at the time.
    Myhrvold knew, and said so a few years later framing it as a "law", still not many understood.

    I think Tanenbaum once commented that Windows was at 60M LOC so big that "no one can understand it".
    What is Linux (just the monolithic centralized Kernel) now, >30M LOC? Same inevitable progression.
    Systemd is what, 1.x, 2M LOC - an irrelevant tiddler by comparison.

    So what is the solution?
    Tanenbaum said wait for a "modern" well designed modular decentralized microkernel, like HURD, and wait, and wait...
    Or just put up with inevitable monolithic centralized complexity bloat in order to have something you can _use_ _now_ - the pragmatic way, the Linus way.

    Actually I think you can usefully extend Myhrvold's law:
    - if software is a gas and always expands to fill it's container, expansion is NOT inevitable, just keep it contained
    - but if you keep a gas contained you can't use it to do any work

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by digitalaudiorock on Thursday November 24, @12:58PM (1 child)

      by digitalaudiorock (688) on Thursday November 24, @12:58PM (#1281457)

      What is Linux (just the monolithic centralized Kernel) now, >30M LOC? Same inevitable progression.
      Systemd is what, 1.x, 2M LOC - an irrelevant tiddler by comparison.

      Really? I almost don't know where to start. LOC? Never mind that almost ALL of that kernel code is for creating hardware specific modules (as in modular) that, if you don't need them, will result in some unused kernel modules sitting on disk, or in a case like mine (Gentoo) a crapload of "LOC" that never even gets compiled. And you think that's a comparison to systemd which is essentially all or nothing? Comparing that to Windows bloat is even sillier. There you're talking about probably 60 GB of binary shit that you can't do without. You couldn't be more off the mark.

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by digitalaudiorock on Thursday November 24, @01:04PM

        by digitalaudiorock (688) on Thursday November 24, @01:04PM (#1281459)

        I also should add that the other reason the kernel code is so big is because, unlike in Windows, in Linux hardware support is almost never removed. I'd say that's a good reason.

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Unixnut on Thursday November 24, @01:54PM (3 children)

    by Unixnut (5779) on Thursday November 24, @01:54PM (#1281467)

    > We used to say that those who didn't understand Unix were doomed to recreate it, poorly. What we didn't know what that linux was going to re-implement a non-modular, massively centralized OS layer like Microsoft used. Systemd on Microsoft Windows just brings it full circle.

    Well, admittedly we didn't think the Linux community would not understand Unix to the point where we have reached today, but there we go.

    When I think back to the start of Linux, a lot of people would say "Linux is not Unix", it is "Unix-like", but at the time it at least made a pretense of attempting to be Unix like.

    I think in the last decade or so, there has been a slow change in the community, towards those who don't really value Unix principles. Perhaps with the push to Linux on Desktop, on mobile phones, etc... Linux ceased trying to be "Unix Like". it became more of a Hybrid, and its goals to be more Windows/Mac like, hence systemd and all the other pushes away from the Unix way of things.

    Linux is a large enough ecosystem that they can pretty much splinter off from Unix and go their own way.

    I guess at the end of the day, in the present time, if you want to run Unix, you should just install and run a Unix OS.

    • (Score: 1) by shrewdsheep on Thursday November 24, @02:13PM (2 children)

      by shrewdsheep (5215) Subscriber Badge on Thursday November 24, @02:13PM (#1281470)

      Please define "unix-like".

      • (Score: 3, Funny) by requerdanos on Thursday November 24, @02:31PM (1 child)

        by requerdanos (5997) Subscriber Badge on Thursday November 24, @02:31PM (#1281480) Journal

        Reasonably POSIX?

        • (Score: 5, Informative) by Unixnut on Thursday November 24, @03:58PM

          by Unixnut (5779) on Thursday November 24, @03:58PM (#1281494)

          Also, the following:

          "The Unix philosophy emphasizes building simple, compact, clear, modular, and extensible code that can be easily maintained and repurposed by developers other than its creators. The Unix philosophy favors composability as opposed to monolithic design. "

          Full details here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy [wikipedia.org]

          Modern changes to Linux have been in the other direction, IMO. More towards the monolithic "black box" design of the Windows world.