The Windows Subsystem for Linux is now open source.
The Windows Subsystem for Linux is now open source
Today we’re very excited to announce the open-source release of the Windows Subsystem for Linux. This is the result of a multiyear effort to prepare for this, and a great closure to the first ever issue raised on the Microsoft/WSL repo:
Don't you think this is another Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish strategy from Microsoft?
That's exactly what it is. Any time now you'll see "the best way to run Linux: on windows" or similar.
Does Lemmy even know what EEE means anymore or are we regurgitating words we heard from some article now?
What's it going to embrace and extend? WSL has existed for ages and is just a way to run Linux in a convenient container on top of Windows. That's it. It's not an attempt to "extenguish" Linux, literally just make the development experience on Windows less painful so people don't switch to another OS. This has nothing to do with EEE.
Open sourcing it with a permissive license can only be a good thing, and again they're doing it to be more appealing to devs and maybe get free bug fixes from the open source community. It isn't some grand conspiracy. But of course this community will react to news of "proprietary blob is now open source" with pessimism.
I think it’s more embrace. They have to compete against so many more entities now.
This is my thought, they've all but lost the battle for cloud servers and they'd rather the developers computers were Windows. WSL allows that.
I think you’re probably right. Microsoft seems less invested in winning an operating system battle at this point. They’re positioning services and abstractions that care less about the end device’s operating system, more so that they’re at least on that device.
I wouldn’t be surprised we see Microsoft “embrace” Proton and Wine in the next 5 to 10 years as it’s far easier to let “the community” predominantly handle supporting legacy Windows versions that have to handle it themselves.
They can’t suddenly lose that entire OS revenue machine however and would need to transition. But I doubt that Redmond are naive to the disruption Wine and Proton are having and how technical users are starting to jump ship.
I don't think that, as Microsoft hasn't done a lot (any?) of that stuff in recent years. It's good to be cautious but really what is the problem with opening the source for something that already existed for a while and is embraced by many?
It's because they have pivoted to subscriptions on office, ads on windows and general data harvesting.
Projects are receiving issues about WSL compatibility issues. So this directly influences FOSS projects.
They would go as far as put bounties for PRs just to get more hold in the community. Just swapping to a permissive license appears to be enough to get contributions.
They can keep their secrets; I won't ever check this repository out.
Normally I would say yes, but WSL is so incredibly necessary for a developer that it might be legit.
It’s not necessary. I’m a full stack developer and I only use it for docker, which isn’t even necessary as you can use docker without it.
Personally I never use it except for docker desktop. I just use powershell
It's kind of the opposite in my mind, WSL is (was) Microsoft capitulating to the fact that Linux is not going away, same with Azure. WSL is mostly for companies. Some companies have a huge contract with Microsoft and manage all laptops with it. Then they grow big enough that they can't ignore Linux because they have people who need to work on Linux. WSL is the way Microsoft keeps their clients, because otherwise they move to Apple based IT.
EEE would have been investing in PowerShell, PuTTY, or similar.
What do you mean azure was a capitulation to? The Internet?
That's their playbook. But honestly I think anyone who plays with WSL will either get a taste and begin learning/transitioning to Linux or device to stick with their "safe" windows machine
WSL is just a way to actually get some shit done when there's a terrible business reason for requiring a native Windows install.
My Microsoft Surface became vastly more useable once I installed Linux on it.
WSL allows me to develop in a Linux environment while still enjoying my very custom Windows setup and programs that I am used to. So no, WSL did not make me choose a side, but instead helps me to get the best of both worlds at once.
Maybe. But Microsoft owns the workplace, so when you get a job they'll demand you can only use Windows, or if you're lucky enough to be allowed to use Linux, the Microsoft management software will suck so much you'll want to use Windows. Microsoft is silently implementing their EEE strategy, and this is only a small part of that. Before long they'll release their AI-focused cloud-connected Linux distro with Windows Desktop compatibility.
Docker doesn't exist in a usable state on Windows, so its an attempt to allow management of servers using Windows, as Windows Server fades away from usage entirely.
Docker works with windows containers, plus wsl can be used as the backend for docker. I use it all the time
No real reason to extinguish here, Microsoft is a services company and can offer those services on Windows and Linux.
I’d wager you’re more likely to see an official compatibility layer on Linux supported by Microsoft before you see them move to extinguish.
💯
Surprisingly few seem to understand the difference between 90s Microsoft and Satya’s Microsoft. Under Satya Microsoft have completely transformed into a services company who aim to have their services run everywhere on absolutely everything. MS services on Linux is coming. Some people still can’t believe that Xbox games are releasing on PlayStation despite it being telegraphed for years.
EEE isn’t a thing they want to do anymore. They want to embrace every platform so they can dominate that market too - not by extending and extinguishing, but by being a one stop shop that no one else can match.
That was 30 years ago, you're going to have to move on one day.
It could be another Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish strategy from Microsoft, because if the increase in Linux user share leads to an increase in malware, most of those users aren't experts.
So there will be an increase in antivirus software for Linux, but that will also lead to DRM in Linux, and Linux may become what I swore to destroy. While BSD distributions, Redox OS, and other systems take over to become the new Linux as it was in its beginnings.
Anyone who's running WSL is probably closer to an "expert" than the average windows user
long obsolete dos text editor
It's a full rewrite in Rust, with no direct relation to the old program.
I know there's a lot of hate for Microsoft on Lemmy, but WSL is one of the best parts of Windows. It's really powerful and well integrated to Windows. Since I still can't leave for pure Linux install, I'm glad for WSL.
Funny that the Linux is best part of Windows lmao
Doubly ironic since Win32 is the only stable ABI on Linux.
Microsoft hate is justified.
WSL made windows tolerable in the time I had to use a windows machine for work.
macOS is still the better choice for corp approved work, integrates decently with IT systems and is a “real” unix system underneath.
Linux on a corporate desktop is mostly about how well you know the IT guys and do they trust you. And of course the software stack.
IT just said no for WSL "ask your manager"
My manager barely knows how to read his email
and doesn't understand why I want 3rd screen
Linux on a corporate desktop is mostly about how well you know the IT guys and do they trust you. And of course the software stack.
I would say it depends more on the commitment of the IT admins to support and manage a fleet of Linux workstations. There are Linux "Active Directory" servers, configuration provisioning tools, ways to centrally and automatically rollout updates, etc. It really depends on if the IT guys invest the same amount of effort to support them or not.
The only Windows PC I use is my work computer.
GPO blocked WSL.
I can't even escape to a command line with the right flavour of slashes between directories. For eight hours a day, all hope is lost.
Only solution is to write your own
WSL is EEE
Fair play to Microsoft here. Hopefully we see some pull requests from non-ms employees and a better wsl experience for us all
What kind of axe do you need?
one of those pointy glass hammers should do it
for breaking windows
Great! With this source code out, I can finally complete the port to Linux. I call it WSL24L, aka "Windows Subsystem For Linux 2, For Linux"
Do you name every FOSS project? This is uncannily close to what an actual open source project would be called, including the logic behind it.
Nah, needs more recursion. The 'W' in "WSL" stands for "WSL"
This is for WSL2, not for WSL1. WSL2 is just a VM, not a big deal it it's open-sourced. WSL1 is superior to WSL2 in every way. BTW, WSL2 is not a continuation of WSL1, they are being developed in parallel. I still try to use WSL1 whenever possible. For Linux specific features, like systemd dependancy and mounting file systems, I'd use full-featured VM instead of WSL2.
I thought WSL2 had a few specific advantages over WSL1, something about disk writes and/or Docker? But yeah, WSL1 was such a cool concept. My understanding is they implemented all the syscalls and API in it so it's basically native.
I tried to use them, as I do most tools like that. On Windows I have always stuck with the MSYS environment that Git for Windows gives you. It's easy enough to work with and has most everything I care about. Plus it's easy to set up. With wsl it's more like a separate thing, it wasn't as easy to run in place. A lot of times I still used batch or powershell scripts so it wasn't totally bash. Like Docker is easier to use from not bash in Windows because the syntax is so wonky.
But now I don't use Windows at all.
So besides the brownie points, im curious what having it open sourced will benefit. Not like you can fork it to run on a different OS. You can make some extensions but to do what? You can’t really tie it further in to the host OS unless you know of some undocumented Win32 APIs.
Maybe im just not thinking creatively enough.
im curious what having it open sourced will benefit
MS won’t have to pay their own people to work on it anymore.
They released their code as MIT which is far more permissive than I was expecting. I was expecting some sort of proprietary license.
But they need to keep doing stuff like this. Devcontainers for VS Code is still proprietary and keeps me from running codium.
Not like you can fork it to run on a different OS.
For WSL1? yep that's effectively impossible.
WSL2 is effectively just a wrapper around the kernel virtualization support and a bundling format, as long as whatever image you run talks to the host properly (like any other virtualised OS would) it'd run.
Making WSL open source could actually lead to some useful contributions and better transparency overall ; and good for Linux tools?
sudo apt-get assorted -lettuce -cheese -onion
Thanks for the kek
fuck microsoft and windows so hard. had to reinstall that shitshow on my mothers computer because a driver update fucked the whole networkstack... they throw error codes and what not but give no help whatsoever. the conclusion of everyone for every problem is to reinstall windows.... shitshow of an os, keep your dirty hands of linux!! can't wait to nuke it and install linux there and have no windows machine left
I reinstalled Windows and had to shit my pants because I was so disgusted in myself. Fuck windows
If you’re having to reinstall windows regularly you’re not very good at being the tech guy. I say this as someone who manages a support team for 50+ Windows machines, and who has been the tech guy for all my friends and family for decades. I can count the number of times I had to reinstall windows on one hand, with a few fingers to spare.
Is this something to do with the three Es?
The 90s called, they want their joke back.
Ah, the Linux Subsystem for Windows (MSFT has never been great at naming things) is finally open source, hooray...
Now do it with rest of the operating system, and I may, possibly have a reason to care.
But it is not a "Linux Subsystem", it is a "Windows Subsystem".
If I write a hypothetical Driver for Linux to support windows, it would be a "Linux Module" not a "Windows Module".
I guess they could have called it "Windows Subsystem for Linux support"
And is that subsystem for windows or for Linux?
Like...how do you find the zoom release for Linux? I thinks it's very stable and now and very comparable to the version available for widows.
Windows, you mean? Please no, thanks, I don't need to see anything of that garbage
can some one ELI5.... is this a way for me to run windows stuff using linux? OR is this for linux stuff to run in windows?
I really want an easier way to run windows stuff in linux, my hatred grows with every notification, update, attempt to advertise to me, and interference in my workspace. but trialing mint is great but the ultimate test is failing with a few programs not really playing nice with linux.
This is for running Linux programs on Windows. ELI5: some programs are made to run on windows, and some programs are made to run on Linux. Microsoft made a thing for windows that makes it able to run programs that were supposed to run on Linux. That thing is called Windows Subsystem for Linux.
What windows programs do you have that are not working well on Linux? There are various tools to run windows programs on Linux, and some work better than others for specific programs. I have had good luck with bottles recently, you might try that if you have not already. Other options I've used with great success in the past: ploy on Linux, Lutris, and wine directly. They all us wine at some level, but have tried and tested configuration for various programs to run well, and help with the installation and management of different wine versions. Depending on your windows programs, one option might be to run windows in a VM on Linux, to run those few programs. Another benefit of this way is that your Linux system is somewhat isolated from your windows programs. This can help with privacy and security.
Thanks for nothing Microsoft
some who can read code tell me why it sucks ass
1/10 no tutorial on how to jump over an office chair.
I don't understand this.
Does this mean Windows programs and exe files will now run natively on linux?
Edit: unclear why someone asking a question gets a 50/50 downvote to upvote response....
"OOOOHHHH!!!!! THIS GUY DOESN'T KNOW ALL THE THINGS I KNOW!!!! BOOOOO!!!!!"
Yes, as long as your Linux distro is Windows.
In my view it's a Linux subsystem for Windows.
Why the name is the other way around, I'll never understand.
The original WSL doesn't use the Linux kernel at all, it's a Windows Subsystem for compatibility with Linux. WSL2 actually visualizes a complete Linux kernel, but the name stuck.
It's a windows subsystem, and it runs linux.
Windows subsystem for (running) linux?
I guess the logic is that it's a subsystem of Windows for the purpose of running Linux apps.
Agree though that it's a confusing name. I remember thinking the same thing about Windows Subsystem for Android (the compatibility layer to run Android apps in Windows)
Yeah the naming is absurdly stupid. Its a linux subsystem that is part of windows nowadays. Its so people on windows can get access to a proper terminal interface.
Now it's our time to do some EEE
Garbage on top of garbage. The true nature of macroshafts desperate grasp to get control of linux.
Its a godsend when you have to use Windows for whatever reason and you can have a functional OS to do things with.
How was it not open source before? Isn't linux gpl?
You are confusing the software and Linux kernel that make up WSL2 because the former was proprietary until now and the latter has always been available on GitHub.
Kernel used in WSL2
That's news to me. Thanks for the info
nice try. get fucked, microsoft.
I still will never understand why it's not called Linux Subsystem for Windows.
There's a trademark for Linux so Microsoft can't name a product starting with Linux.
https://xcancel.com/richturn_ms/status/1245481405947076610
So they can use Linux in the name, just not at the beginning? We're so stupid. Can they do Windows Subsystem for Coke? Or Windows Subsystem for McDonald's? Or Windows Subsystem for MacOs?
Good gravy.
Still doesnt explain why it wasn't called Windows Linux Subsystem (WLS)
Not in the spirit of free software, if you ask me.
I got hung up on this before too but it's apparently "Windows Subsystem for (using) Linux"
I think it is because Windows has many subsystems, it's just that you don't hear about most of them aside from WSL.
So it is referring to the particular Windows Subsystem (of which there are many) that can run or emulate Linux.
Wait, Windows still has POSIX subsystem or is it only listed for documentation reasons (it was there at least in old NT days)?
Maybe they just named it like the previous attempt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Services_for_UNIX