• umbraroze@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Windows subsystem for Linux software” would probably have been a mouthful.

        It’s not really that ambiguous in practice. Linux doesn’t have “subsystems”, but Windows architecture calls them that. 64-bit Windows has a “subsystem” for 32-bit applications. And a separate “subsystem” for console applications (command line). Etc etc

      • oktoberpaard@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        WSL 1 is a compatibility layer that lets Linux programs run on the Windows kernel by translating Linux system calls to Windows system calls, so in that sense I understand the name: it’s a Windows subsystem for Linux [compatibility]. It doesn’t use the Linux kernel at all. With WSL 2 they’re using a real Linux kernel in a virtual machine, so there the name doesn’t make much sense anymore.

      • xlash123@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Really just an English problem. Read it as it is a subsystem by Windows for Linux.

        But yeah, LSW would’ve been more clear. Plus, it’s almost LSD.