Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Linux, BSD, Solaris, etc. have significant differences among them, and the source code needs to be aware of them. Same with all crossplatform software.

But from the perspective of a Linux binary running on WSL, running on WSL should be the same as running on Linux. If bash is an exception to that, that seems more like a hack on Microsoft's part.

If they implemented the execve() syscall and others, starting whatever other user specified shell should not be problematic.



I'm not going to disagree with you there but then I did cover that point myself about 2 posts earlier.


The point you conceded is literally the only point I've trying to make since the original post.

Go back each level and you will see the same point being made over and over again. You owe me like 20 HN karma now.

Next time, rather than rushing to downvote, accuse of trolling and insult, read more carefully.


You need to reread this thread because I am literally the only person who entertained your poorly written arguments and spoke to you like you weren't a troll. Instead of insulting me and demanding compensation you really should be thanking me for being the only person who gave your opinion the time of day.

I wasn't the one who downvoted your comments. In fact quite the opposite as I actually upvoted your OP (I felt a little sorry for you) but now I wish I hadn't bothered.

And for what it's worth, your original argument was not that Bash.exe shouldn't include the WSL. You've just subtly inched your way to that conclusion after all the other complaints you made were directly debunked. I even threw you a lifeline a few comments earlier (as referenced in my previous post) and you argued that wasn't your point, yet now -somehow- it is? Jeez....


laumars, 13 hours ago:

>So while the trolling remarks of the OP are clearly unconstructive, i can at least emphasise​ with why he feels the need to speak out against MS. He just did so in a pretty lousy way.

Just stay on topic and avoid personal attacks.

I have been consistently referring to GNU bash, Linux and Linux software interchangeably.

Creating confusion around those terms because is not in the best interest of the community of users of GNU/Linux.

Even if Microsoft, Windows and WSL never existed, GNU bash would continue to be what it is, which is: A Unix shell. Not a technical requirement to run Linux software.


typo: I have been consistently against referring to GNU bash, Linux and Linux software interchangeably.

Also against referring to GNU bash and bash.exe interchangeably. Or people trying to redefine what GNU bash is because of how it is distributed under Windows.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: