Has anyone tried WSL on Windows ARM?
-
WSL2 is just a vm, WSL1 worked like wine, but reversed, only the name is similar, nothing else (classic microsoft...)
According to arm it's working: https://learn.arm.com/learning-paths/laptops-and-desktops/wsl2/ We could virtualize different architectures for ages, nothing special here.
About these new laptops, I have no experience yet, but eagerly waiting for them to have usable bare metal linux support. Ubuntu supports development for them, some of them are already bootable, more info here: https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/ubuntu-24-10-concept-snapdragon-x-elite/48800
-
I have a surface laptop 7. You need to make sure ARM images exist, but apart from that its worked great
-
Why did they give up on the wine-like approach? That seems so much better than running an entire VM (not even a Microsoft person but still).
-
I think it's more convenient to their overall design of modern Windows, IIRC by default it'll install the running version of Windows to a hypervisor also. For their purposes, for the majority of users, there would be little to no performance losses.
-
I remember a lot of things were not working. For example I was a GNU screen user, and no terminal multiplexer could work at that time in WSL1. They added support to
tmuxafter a while and I switched to that and never switched back, rest is history....The point is just like how not everything working ootb in wine, the same is true for the other direction.
They would have to invest more work which costs money, but if they just ship the linux kernel, which is already written, and the users already bought big ssds and have highspeed internet, so they could just use that for free, it makes more sense, and makes more money to the shareholders
-
Because one of the features of Linux that Microsoft is most interested in is docker/oci containers, but that is a feature specific to the Linux kernel (and thus requires a virtual machine).
-
even the old 'xp mode' for win7 was just a vm.
-
I always wonder how Docker works on macOS with a more UNIX-style kernel than Linux when even FreeBSD gave up on the effort.
I understand macOS is way closer to Linux than Windows (despite its differences) but is it really that hard to do Docker/OCI out of Linux?
-
That’s interesting. I haven’t really used Windows since the XP days so I didn’t realize there was already some VM stuff going on to begin with.
-
I always wonder how Docker works on macOS with a more UNIX-style kernel than Linux
It doesn't. Macos also uses a virtual machine for docker.
but is it really that hard to do Docker/OCI out of Linux?
Yes. The runtimes containers use are dependent on cgroups, seccomp, namespaces, and a few other linux kernel specific features.
You could implement a wine like project to run the linux binaries that containers contain, and then run some sandboxing to make it be a proper container, but no virtual machines or virtual machine container runtimes* are easier.
Linuxulator, a freebsd project does the above.
https://people.freebsd.org/~dch/posts/2024-12-04-freebsd-containers/
*these are much lighter than a normal vm, I'll need to check if this is what macos does. I know for a fact docker on windows uses a full Linux vm though.
-
Actually that’s a good point that I’ve completely forgotten. Docker uses the modern macOS APIs for virtualization these days, and uses Rosetta2 for
amd64containers. -
Don't waste time doing that, just run real Linux.
-
FreeBSD is supporting OCI containers natively. If the app in your container can run on Linuxulator, it will run on FreeBSD.
-
Yes, I have a Surface Pro 11 for my travel laptop and it works well. No notable differences from my previous Dell XPS 13.
