Anybody manage to make their Bash/WSL actually look good? I've got it just running in, what, cmd I guess? I don't know. Anyway it's fuckugly. I had to just set all the fonts to white on a black background because otherwise the returns from npm installs and git status and stuff would be unreadable deep blue.
Don't get me wrong, I love using it, but it doesn't beat the aesthetics of a terminal on a mac or a nicely configured ubuntu terminal.
ConEmu with Bash/WSL has not worked out for me. I came across way too many incompatibilities, and weird behaviour. Some of these are documented in (1). That said, ConEMU was never really designed to support UNIX/VT100 terminal environments from the start. Its more of a cmd.exe replacement.
Instead, I've got a pretty good setup using Xming (2), a native win32 X server implementation.
In Bash/WSL, I set the DISPLAY variable appropriately and launch my terminal emulator of choice, as well as Emacs.
This setup has worked out to be very fast and stable for me.
I had some trouble too and tried some complicated setup with wslbridge and other stuff I don't even remember. But in the end I got it easily working by configuring this simple task in ConEmu (everything is working, including arrow keys):
%windir%\system32\bash.exe -c "cd ~ && bash"
If you want the nice Ubuntu icon, add this as task parameter:
-icon "%USERPROFILE%\AppData\Local\lxss\bash.ico"
You can then use the ConEmu theme of your choice and the colors are far more readable than with the default console.
See default theme for instance:
They're going to need to change that window icon. When WSL meant Ubuntu it made sense. Now that it's becoming distro agnostic, it needs a more universal representation. Bring on the penguins.
If you prefer not to install an external program (e.g. wsltty), this gist https://gist.github.com/P4/4245793 has some registry presets for prettifying the built in console.
> ping, traceroute, mtr etc don't work. Neither does ssh tunneling. No ssh server.
These things work, as long as you are not under a firewall. The problem is that currently it doesn't expose anything to whitelist if you do use a firewall, but hopefully they'll sort this out eventually.
Most of these problems have been fixed as of the January Creators Update for Windows 10.
SSH server is still iffy, because Windows 10 comes with an SSH server (not OpenSSH), which you'll have to disable. It was very weird to try to SSH into WSL and get a cmd.exe prompt.
Also, once you install opensshd with apt, the server is only active while its terminal window is open (since closing the terminal window kills the WSL init process).
You can run it in another terminal than the standard cmd. I've got mine running through cmder (http://cmder.net/) which is just a preconfigured ConEmu (https://conemu.github.io/) with some additional stuff out of the box.
ConEmu's defaults are pretty ugly, too, but with some tweaking you can get a good UI out of it. As another tip, Alt+Enter will maximize ConEmu to full-screen without any window chrome at all.
It was a bit of a chicken and egg problem: there was no incentive to have a decent terminal since+because there was no decent shell+platform. IOW the command line was a rudimentary tool, an artefact from the past, not a central piece of the experience. PowerShell barely moved the dial, but now that there's a trend towards the Unix experience, that may very well bootstrap some more glorious CLI days on Windows, which may even benefit PowerShell in some way.
You can install xrdp and some lightweight DE like Xfce, and then just RDP into your Linux desktop. Here's Xfce (and its terminal) running inside an RDP session on Win10:
You can run a Windows X server, then run whatever X-based programs (including terminals) you want on the Linux side and forward the display to the Windows X Server.
The primary reason I even looked at a Mac, way back in the MacOS 10.2 days, was because there is a Unix underneath the pretty interface. I bought my first Mac and never looked back.
Stuff like this is making me look at Windows machines again.
I'm betting this is the real end-goal of WSL. MacBooks were once expensive, but high-quality, grab-and-go unixy development machines. Now, they're mostly just expensive.
When WSL matures, any commodity laptop will be a cheap, decent quality, grab-and-go unixy dev machine. It'll probably be easier and more reliable than installing Ubuntu directly! At that point, web and server devs will migrate en mass from Mac to Windows.
Then they will discover Clang for Windows and that dev tools for Windows in general are actually pretty nice. And, since they are already running their server code on WSL, it becomes much easier and more interesting to get it running in Windows directly. Bang! Huge uptick in open-source server development on Windows.
I just set up a cheap Windows 10 laptop I bought for my mom. It was the first time I got in touch with Windows again since the XP days. Can't say I'm too intrigued, imho the UI is lacking in so many points. I couldn't figure out how to get rid of that Cortana-thing in the taskbar, every window is littered with ribbons, list goes on and on and on … I don't see why I would go for Windows + WSL when I can just slap a distro of choice on it?
While I wish Apple got its shit together, I have 0 incentive to move to Windows as a developer. I'd have to find replacements for a lot of small utility apps I take for granted on OS X, and I'd have to cope with the stupid UI Windows shoves down my throat.
Huh? MacBooks are unlikely to disappear, companies love how slowly they depreciate (and are easily sellable), while it is by far the most optimized unix system out there. Pound for pound, a MacBook will last longer while doing more than a Windows or Linux laptop, despite Microsoft's and Linus's efforts to rectify this.
Why would anyone pick Windows over Debian for development if their target is a Linux boxen in a server farm somewhere? The tooling is third rate, the WSL (which is a horrible name btw) has thousands of bugs by Microsoft's own admission, and this is after years of MS laboring to get WSL into its current state.
I just don't see why you'd choose a platform that does pants on head retarded shit like making wget open IE 11 rather than downloading the file at a given URL. This isn't rocket science here, I know all the MS people across the water in Redmond & Bellevue can fix this without much work, but apparently worse than non-existent is the best MS can do.
i'm saying this now; POSIX will never be a first class citizen on windows - we might get shims in /proc and /dev, but windows will never run from POSIX. as long as Win32 exists (and lets face it, that's not going away for a long time), we're basically stuck with running a docker container with linux on it in windows.
and that might be all you need. but for many *nix people, this is no where near enough.
If anyone trusts microsoft right now after the past year or two worth of things we've learned I highly doubt their dedication to a free and open source vision of the future.
I actually have a hard time beleiving some of these comments are even organic... (web and server devs are going to migrate to windows!). What world do these people live in? It's like people live in fantasy land and have forgotten the 90's truth of MS.
Embrace. Extend.
Extinguish.
RMS was and is right. Either the user controls the program or the program controls the user. Microsoft has shown they are only interested in controlling the user, and not in giving the user control.
I say this as a senior sysadmin who has dealt with every aspect of their OS's in production for a long time, and I'm fed up with it. Honestly I think Win8/10 was the final straw for me, for what it's worth.
I've since moved completely off windows to gnu+linux, despite the rough points such as gaming. It's been a freeing experience I wish more people had the guts to be a part of. I'm also heavily considering refusing to support windows systems in general, something I think we should all consider.
Isn't it a bit ironic, given your concern with 90s-era Microsoft practices...
...that your comment is basically just FUD?
I'm not saying your wrong! But your comment is, clearly, intended to make people feel fear, uncertainty, and doubt about Microsoft, the Windows platform, what MS may choose to do in the future, etc. And you don't have any particular factual claims to back it up (classic FUD tactic), just an appeal to authority ("as a senior sysadmin") and some handwaving about events that took place long before most of us were actually in the workforce. I mean, I'm the oldest dev on my team, and I was a teenager when the Halloween Documents were published.
We live in a very different world. I'm not saying MS wouldn't abuse their power if they could, but you know...what power? And how does WSL provide them an opening? At this point, I'm much, much more concerned about Facebook than Microsoft, and I think the onus is on MS critics to explain exactly what they fear. And no, chanting "embrace, extend, extinguish" is not an explanation.
> Microsoft has shown they are only interested in controlling the user, and not in giving the user control.
Is very well supported by their recent we'll-do-everything-possible to get Win10 on people's machines, force upgrades, forced (and ultra comprehensive, but mostly secretive until a month ago) telemetry.
> We live in a very different world. I'm not saying MS wouldn't abuse their power if they could, but you know...what power?
They have spent the last year and a half abusing their power of Win7 updates to force people into Win10, which takes away the power that people had to resist the Win7->Win10 upgrade. If you missed that, we truly do live in different worlds.
> Isn't it a bit ironic, given your concern with 90s-era Microsoft practices that your comment is basically just FUD?
Apologies for not taking the time to sit down and list all the ways MS has been bad for the FOSS world and the user. For someone who references the halloween documents and the hn userbase in general I think most of this should be mostly obvious and not need specific hand-holding. As for your accusation of fud, fud by defnition is about false or disinformation in combination with the appeal to fear. I'm basing my comments off true information, and not using the fallacious appeal to fear but instead telling how proprietary systems do affect people.
> just an appeal to authority ("as a senior sysadmin")
A key point to the appeal to authority issue is that it isn't inherently a fallacy, and only becomes one with used in an informal fallacy, which I did not. In rhetoric establishing authority is an important (but often overvalued) aspect of argument. As a senior sysadmin, this makes my propositions more likely, but not logically certain. Not a fallacy at all.
> handwaving about events that took place long before most of us were actually in the workforce.
What does the date of these actions have to do with the issue at hand? The four principles of software freedom are still not met by MS, and that's just as relevant today as it was 20 years ago.
> We live in a very different world. I'm not saying MS wouldn't abuse their power if they could, but you know...what power? And how does WSL provide them an opening?
Where do I begin? First of all, we don't really live in such a different world. Fundamental principles of software freedom have been the same since the 80's when they were first brought up, (though they have been refined somewhat). Second, not only would MS abuse their power, but they already have and do! As for what power, I don't know how you can be serious and ask such a question. Instead of ranting I will just give you a good link to read. https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-microsoft.en.html
> At this point, I'm much, much more concerned about Facebook than Microsoft
This is a logical fallacy. We aren't talking about FB. I'm concerned about it too, but to handwave away MS issues in this way is not conducive to honest intellectual conversation.
> I think the onus is on MS critics to explain exactly what they fear.
We have, for years at that. See above gnu.org link for a start.
> And how does WSL provide them an opening?
You mean other than replacing a gplv2 kernel with a closed source proprietary one?
Hey your opinion is cool and all. But there are a lot of people who put a lot of hard work into this project, because we're developers too, and we think the idea of being able to run a full linux userland on top of the NT kernel is fucking cool.
This project has never been about EEE. It's not about controlling the user. It's the complete opposite. It's all about choice. I like a linux style development environment more than I like Windows style. In my free time I mostly write python applications and do webdev-y stuff, and WSL makes it really easy for me to do that.
> This project has never been about EEE. It's not about controlling the user. It's the complete opposite. It's all about choice.
well, those are the first two 'E's of the picture, if this is the case. with the latest edition of Windows 10 (S, i think?), microsoft have already prepared the stage for the third.
> being able to run a full linux userland on top of the NT kernel is fucking cool.
I could do that before with virtualbox. What kind of benefits besides slight speed increases would we see using the posix WSL?
>It's not about controlling the user. It's the complete opposite. It's all about choice.
If I create a prison for you, but then let you choose your cell, do you consider that a valid choice? That's what this is, and I know what you mean but the reality is that windows is a walled garden prison for the user.
>I like a linux style development environment more than I like Windows style.
I don't trust Microsoft. But they're less evil than Apple, look at Apple is doing with its locked garden (no GPL, only one browser engine allowed, no JITing except for their Javascript engine, development only on their platform, etc., etc.).
On top of this, Microsoft is a smaller fish these days. They've lost mobile, probably forever. They're behind in search, ads, cloud, etc.
So they're, maybe not toothless, but definitely less harmful than they were in the 90's.
For EEE they need to be able to extinguish. They can't extinguish Linux or OSS now, it's basically impossible.
> I don't trust Microsoft. But they're less evil than Apple, look at Apple is doing with its locked garden (no GPL, only one browser engine allowed, no JITing except for their Javascript engine, development only on their platform, etc., etc.).
Hate to break it to you, but the Microsoft Store has the same limitations regarding browser engines as Apple's iOS App Store.
Would be nicer if they would just document the bootstrap process for initializing a WSL "container" (or whatever their term is) so the community can do this on its own.
Some of these distros come with browsers and JavaScript engines that can run in the console (such as node.js, w3m, lynx, etc.).
Third-party HTML and JavaScript engines are banned in the Windows Store, so can someone explain how this uneven enforcement of their own rules is ethical?
Consider this quote[1] from a Microsoft spokesperson on May 9:
> Windows Store apps that browse the web must use HTML and JavaScript engines provided by the Windows Platform. All Windows Store content is certified by Microsoft to help ensure a quality experience and keep your devices safer.
They can do this all they want but no amount of linux in windows is going to get me back to using it on my main home desktop. I have no choice at work (an all MS stack: c# and sqlserver) but yeah I'll just stick to VMs, docker, or linux on bare-metal. I get the latest kernels, the ability to run anything in the nix ecosystem without arbitrary drawbacks.
*Arbitrary is harsh, they did a lot of heavy lifting to get Windows, but it's still early and still rough imo.
I didn't realize staying on the bleeding edge kernels was such a performance boost, that it's worth shying away from an entire ecosystem. It sounds a bit elitist.
Alternatively, when I use Windows now I'll get both PowerShell and a full Unix environment. For my development work so far, none of those arbitrary drawbacks have stopped WSFL from being a champ. On the plus side, I don't constantly have to edit configuration files after every update because my wireless card/window manager/etc broke.
For me, it's the opposite: I don't want to be on the bleeding edge of forced windows updates, so I'll run a linux system and VM an older-but-still-compatible windows system where I can keep the environment stable without worrying about security updates (due to it being in a sandbox). I realize this doesn't fit everyone's use case, but wanted to offer an additional perspective.
The win 10 experience for me has been such a disappointment between the privacy concerns and the overall UI I'd much rather not bother. To each their own, though.
Well, there's a variety of reasons that being on new kernels (or a linux kernel at all)
Things like bpf if you're doing performance profiling
Ready access to PMCs (The Intel PMC stuff is a pain in the ass to get working in Windows, because you have to build a signed driver for MSR access) without paying the $900 for vTune
Access to perf
There's really no way to do performance engineering on Bash/WSL
At my office the general consensus is "hate using the Mac but development is easier on a unix based machine" and our IT department doesn't have a process for securely preparing Linux machines.
The Fedora support definitely has me excited. Will try it out on my home computer before making the real jump.
It was enough to get me to try it. I like it generally, once it's configured properly.
Using Windows to write software that runs on Ubuntu servers is not really much harder than using a Mac to do the same thing. You have to use a VM either way.
By the way, I like Powershell so much I installed it on my Macbook Pro.
Readit News
Don't get me wrong, I love using it, but it doesn't beat the aesthetics of a terminal on a mac or a nicely configured ubuntu terminal.
http://i.imgur.com/l4Oi2up.png
http://i.imgur.com/BHDxdOJ.png
Instead, I've got a pretty good setup using Xming (2), a native win32 X server implementation.
In Bash/WSL, I set the DISPLAY variable appropriately and launch my terminal emulator of choice, as well as Emacs.
This setup has worked out to be very fast and stable for me.
1. http://conemu.github.io/en/CygwinMsys.html 2. http://www.straightrunning.com/XmingNotes/
%windir%\system32\bash.exe -c "cd ~ && bash"
If you want the nice Ubuntu icon, add this as task parameter:
-icon "%USERPROFILE%\AppData\Local\lxss\bash.ico"
You can then use the ConEmu theme of your choice and the colors are far more readable than with the default console. See default theme for instance:
https://lut.im/fyFmIT9zwj/IjbmI5FsOHq2ik6z.png
For all of X's warts, its networking protocol works just as intended for this kind of use case.
https://i.imgur.com/VVtLVfs.png
EDIT: ah just saw that you have your .bashrc in that image, thanks!
https://github.com/mintty/wsltty
It's all about changing the color palette of the console window, which is kinda a pain, but well worth it.
I use tmux super heavily, so a nice .tmux conf pays off.
As a network engineer it's almost useless to me, ping, traceroute, mtr etc don't work. Neither does ssh tunneling. No ssh server.
Still using Cygwin for those reasons.
These things work, as long as you are not under a firewall. The problem is that currently it doesn't expose anything to whitelist if you do use a firewall, but hopefully they'll sort this out eventually.
SSH server is still iffy, because Windows 10 comes with an SSH server (not OpenSSH), which you'll have to disable. It was very weird to try to SSH into WSL and get a cmd.exe prompt.
Also, once you install opensshd with apt, the server is only active while its terminal window is open (since closing the terminal window kills the WSL init process).
Shell - http://imgur.com/CeotBpF Neovim - http://imgur.com/HI3u2mA
http://i.imgur.com/Z5mRLIs.png
ConEmu
http://imgur.com/pwzwjZu
Lets you actually make things readable - even pretty if you care to.
Stuff like this is making me look at Windows machines again.
When WSL matures, any commodity laptop will be a cheap, decent quality, grab-and-go unixy dev machine. It'll probably be easier and more reliable than installing Ubuntu directly! At that point, web and server devs will migrate en mass from Mac to Windows.
Then they will discover Clang for Windows and that dev tools for Windows in general are actually pretty nice. And, since they are already running their server code on WSL, it becomes much easier and more interesting to get it running in Windows directly. Bang! Huge uptick in open-source server development on Windows.
And, of course, VS offers Android and iOS targeting in both C++ and .NET. The C++ info is here: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2017/04/18/android-a...
Well, you know, they _already_ are. We don't have to wait for anything. And even cheaper, if you can avoid paying the windows tax ;)
While I wish Apple got its shit together, I have 0 incentive to move to Windows as a developer. I'd have to find replacements for a lot of small utility apps I take for granted on OS X, and I'd have to cope with the stupid UI Windows shoves down my throat.
Why would anyone pick Windows over Debian for development if their target is a Linux boxen in a server farm somewhere? The tooling is third rate, the WSL (which is a horrible name btw) has thousands of bugs by Microsoft's own admission, and this is after years of MS laboring to get WSL into its current state.
I just don't see why you'd choose a platform that does pants on head retarded shit like making wget open IE 11 rather than downloading the file at a given URL. This isn't rocket science here, I know all the MS people across the water in Redmond & Bellevue can fix this without much work, but apparently worse than non-existent is the best MS can do.
and that might be all you need. but for many *nix people, this is no where near enough.
I actually have a hard time beleiving some of these comments are even organic... (web and server devs are going to migrate to windows!). What world do these people live in? It's like people live in fantasy land and have forgotten the 90's truth of MS.
Embrace. Extend.
Extinguish.
RMS was and is right. Either the user controls the program or the program controls the user. Microsoft has shown they are only interested in controlling the user, and not in giving the user control.
I say this as a senior sysadmin who has dealt with every aspect of their OS's in production for a long time, and I'm fed up with it. Honestly I think Win8/10 was the final straw for me, for what it's worth.
I've since moved completely off windows to gnu+linux, despite the rough points such as gaming. It's been a freeing experience I wish more people had the guts to be a part of. I'm also heavily considering refusing to support windows systems in general, something I think we should all consider.
...that your comment is basically just FUD?
I'm not saying your wrong! But your comment is, clearly, intended to make people feel fear, uncertainty, and doubt about Microsoft, the Windows platform, what MS may choose to do in the future, etc. And you don't have any particular factual claims to back it up (classic FUD tactic), just an appeal to authority ("as a senior sysadmin") and some handwaving about events that took place long before most of us were actually in the workforce. I mean, I'm the oldest dev on my team, and I was a teenager when the Halloween Documents were published.
We live in a very different world. I'm not saying MS wouldn't abuse their power if they could, but you know...what power? And how does WSL provide them an opening? At this point, I'm much, much more concerned about Facebook than Microsoft, and I think the onus is on MS critics to explain exactly what they fear. And no, chanting "embrace, extend, extinguish" is not an explanation.
We'll, I must say I preferred them actually.
- the close button on my upgrade prompts didn't mean yes.
- clippy didn't send my files keystrokes and speech online on its own
- candy crush saga equivalents didn't just install on their own
- applications that I installed weren't deleted by the OS
- the computer didn't restart on its own because of updates, closing all ssh sessions and killing processes with days of work.
- etc.
> Microsoft has shown they are only interested in controlling the user, and not in giving the user control.
Is very well supported by their recent we'll-do-everything-possible to get Win10 on people's machines, force upgrades, forced (and ultra comprehensive, but mostly secretive until a month ago) telemetry.
> We live in a very different world. I'm not saying MS wouldn't abuse their power if they could, but you know...what power?
They have spent the last year and a half abusing their power of Win7 updates to force people into Win10, which takes away the power that people had to resist the Win7->Win10 upgrade. If you missed that, we truly do live in different worlds.
Apologies for not taking the time to sit down and list all the ways MS has been bad for the FOSS world and the user. For someone who references the halloween documents and the hn userbase in general I think most of this should be mostly obvious and not need specific hand-holding. As for your accusation of fud, fud by defnition is about false or disinformation in combination with the appeal to fear. I'm basing my comments off true information, and not using the fallacious appeal to fear but instead telling how proprietary systems do affect people.
> just an appeal to authority ("as a senior sysadmin")
A key point to the appeal to authority issue is that it isn't inherently a fallacy, and only becomes one with used in an informal fallacy, which I did not. In rhetoric establishing authority is an important (but often overvalued) aspect of argument. As a senior sysadmin, this makes my propositions more likely, but not logically certain. Not a fallacy at all.
> handwaving about events that took place long before most of us were actually in the workforce.
What does the date of these actions have to do with the issue at hand? The four principles of software freedom are still not met by MS, and that's just as relevant today as it was 20 years ago.
> We live in a very different world. I'm not saying MS wouldn't abuse their power if they could, but you know...what power? And how does WSL provide them an opening?
Where do I begin? First of all, we don't really live in such a different world. Fundamental principles of software freedom have been the same since the 80's when they were first brought up, (though they have been refined somewhat). Second, not only would MS abuse their power, but they already have and do! As for what power, I don't know how you can be serious and ask such a question. Instead of ranting I will just give you a good link to read. https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-microsoft.en.html
> At this point, I'm much, much more concerned about Facebook than Microsoft
This is a logical fallacy. We aren't talking about FB. I'm concerned about it too, but to handwave away MS issues in this way is not conducive to honest intellectual conversation.
> I think the onus is on MS critics to explain exactly what they fear.
We have, for years at that. See above gnu.org link for a start.
> And how does WSL provide them an opening?
You mean other than replacing a gplv2 kernel with a closed source proprietary one?
This project has never been about EEE. It's not about controlling the user. It's the complete opposite. It's all about choice. I like a linux style development environment more than I like Windows style. In my free time I mostly write python applications and do webdev-y stuff, and WSL makes it really easy for me to do that.
But then again, that's just my opinion.
well, those are the first two 'E's of the picture, if this is the case. with the latest edition of Windows 10 (S, i think?), microsoft have already prepared the stage for the third.
I could do that before with virtualbox. What kind of benefits besides slight speed increases would we see using the posix WSL?
>It's not about controlling the user. It's the complete opposite. It's all about choice.
If I create a prison for you, but then let you choose your cell, do you consider that a valid choice? That's what this is, and I know what you mean but the reality is that windows is a walled garden prison for the user.
>I like a linux style development environment more than I like Windows style.
Then why not dev on GNU+linux?
Also, notice the emphasis on GNU.
On top of this, Microsoft is a smaller fish these days. They've lost mobile, probably forever. They're behind in search, ads, cloud, etc.
So they're, maybe not toothless, but definitely less harmful than they were in the 90's.
For EEE they need to be able to extinguish. They can't extinguish Linux or OSS now, it's basically impossible.
Hate to break it to you, but the Microsoft Store has the same limitations regarding browser engines as Apple's iOS App Store.
Third-party HTML and JavaScript engines are banned in the Windows Store, so can someone explain how this uneven enforcement of their own rules is ethical?
Consider this quote[1] from a Microsoft spokesperson on May 9:
> Windows Store apps that browse the web must use HTML and JavaScript engines provided by the Windows Platform. All Windows Store content is certified by Microsoft to help ensure a quality experience and keep your devices safer.
[1]: http://www.zdnet.com/article/google-chrome-wont-be-allowed-o...
*Arbitrary is harsh, they did a lot of heavy lifting to get Windows, but it's still early and still rough imo.
Alternatively, when I use Windows now I'll get both PowerShell and a full Unix environment. For my development work so far, none of those arbitrary drawbacks have stopped WSFL from being a champ. On the plus side, I don't constantly have to edit configuration files after every update because my wireless card/window manager/etc broke.
Things like bpf if you're doing performance profiling Ready access to PMCs (The Intel PMC stuff is a pain in the ass to get working in Windows, because you have to build a signed driver for MSR access) without paying the $900 for vTune Access to perf
There's really no way to do performance engineering on Bash/WSL
When you have Intel wifi you'll have to enable the non-free repo, and that's about the extent of it.
The Fedora support definitely has me excited. Will try it out on my home computer before making the real jump.
Using Windows to write software that runs on Ubuntu servers is not really much harder than using a Mac to do the same thing. You have to use a VM either way.
By the way, I like Powershell so much I installed it on my Macbook Pro.
Why did you bring this comment here? Is your hope to convince other people, or to reaffirm your decision to yourself?
It seems off topic.
For example, the integration with VSCode :
https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode/issues/25033
https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode/issues/24967
But both teams, WSL and VSCode, are very, very responsive. I'm pretty sure in a couple of months everything will be fine.
https://github.com/Microsoft/PTVS/pull/2500
https://www.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/64xyd7/nix_package_m...