It's Now Even Easier Setting Up Windows Subsystem For Linux On Windows 10

[KaoDome]

I still don't get that name. Shouldn't it be the Linux subsystem for Windows?

Before WSL there were several things for enterprise users (I don't recall if they were available for Pro versions of Windows, but they surely were in Enterprise) and the names were more apt.

It was Windows Services for UNIX after they acquired Interix which was sort of a POSIX subsystem for Windows, hell I remember even NT having some sort of POSIX compliance from a different layer (damn, I'm old ). In recent-ish versions of Windows, like 7, the name for the thing was SUA, Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications.

It was rather limited to be honest, and I think it was already deprecated by the time Windows 7 came out, but it was a thing. Then came WSL 1 and now WSL 2 certainly being easier to maintain for them than WSL 1.

[rabcor]

The problem is I don't want to run Linux on Windows, I want to run Windows on Linux.

[uid313]

Also I agree that the name is confusing. "Linux VM subsystem for Windows" is a more appropriate name.

I don't think WSL is a virtual machine.

[blacknova]

I don't think WSL is a virtual machine.

WSL is not, WSL2 is.

[t.s.]

I pray that by the time I die Microsoft and Windows are no more. Seeing these hideous Frankenstein screenshots of the glorious sanctuary desecrated by the filthy disgusting thing is the spookiest thing I've seen all spooktober by leagues.

Well, if we look hundres of linux distros, almost (or more than?) tens of wayland implementation (compositor or not), myriad DE and WM, it is in no time windows will have their usable linux if they wanted to do it; with linux trailing far behind. If only linux devs can be more focused. Say, just 3 big distro or fewer with packages or script to install 'custom distros', 1 complete wayland implementation (like X, but wayland-style) that can be used by multiple DE/WM, and max 2 DE and/or WM.

[t.s.]

The problem is I don't want to run Linux on Windows, I want to run Windows on Linux.

kvm, or virtualbox, or vmware.

[Vistaus]

Well, if we look hundres of linux distros, almost (or more than?) tens of wayland implementation (compositor or not), myriad DE and WM, it is in no time windows will have their usable linux if they wanted to do it; with linux trailing far behind. If only linux devs can be more focused. Say, just 3 big distro or fewer with packages or script to install 'custom distros', 1 complete wayland implementation (like X, but wayland-style) that can be used by multiple DE/WM, and max 2 DE and/or WM.

And what if you don't want to use Wayland but something like Arcan? Your proposal takes away freedom.

[AndyChow]

I don't think the name is confusing at all. It's a subsystem to run linux. That subsystem runs on Windows. Windows subsystem for Linux. Perfect name. In any case I bet in a few years they will claim that WSL is a meaningless combination of letters and doesn't stand for anything. They always do that when their lawyers wake up and inform them you can't trademark an acronym.

[tildearrow]

The problem is I don't want to run Linux on Windows, I want to run Windows on Linux.

Proposal for future distros: wine /install (yes, the Windows-style switch is intended)

[ssokolow]

I don't think the name is confusing at all. It's a subsystem to run linux. That subsystem runs on Windows. Windows subsystem for Linux. Perfect name.

Except that it could also be read as "Window Subsystem Module for the Linux Kernel" and that's the reading that seems most intuitive to a lot of people.