Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Project Lets You Install Arch Linux In the Windows Subsystem For Linux

Posted by msmash on from the good-things dept.

prisoninmate writes: Softpedia reports that there's a new project on GitHub, called alwsl, which promises to let you install the Arch Linux operating system on Windows 10's new WSL (Windows Subsystem for Linux) feature, which allows users to run native Linux command-line tools directly on the Windows operating system alongside their modern desktop and apps. For example, Canonical and Microsoft brought Bash on Ubuntu on Windows using the new WSL functionality. For now, the alwsl project, which is developed by a group of German developers that call themselves "Turbo Developers," offers a .bat file that you can use to install Arch Linux on a WSL (Windows Subsystem for Linux) host, but the software is in developer preview stage. The first stable release, alwsl 1.0 will be able not only to install Arch Linux on the Windows Subsystem for Linux host in Windows 10 editions that support it, but also to create and manage users and snapshots. Also, it looks like it will get rolling upgrades just like a normal Arch Linux installation gets. The final release is expected to launch on December 2016, and you can monitor its development progress on GitHub.

77 comments

  1. Better use Linux directly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    and put Windows 10 into the trash can. Dual booting is the future, but since Microsoft will intentionally break it with many little "update accidents", you might just as well use Linux directly. It works fine and doesn't pester you with unwanted updates at the wrong time.

    1. Re:Better use Linux directly by by+(1706743) · · Score: 1

      I have my Windows 10 install in a VM (Linux host), and I'm very pleased with the setup (a multi-monitor setup is helpful but not necessary). Performance is adequate for the basics, although it's a little silly that I need to run a VM just to be able to properly edit a document. Yes, I know there are open alternatives, but for documents with images, formulae, tracked changes, etc., I find it easier to just use Word (obviously I prefer a TeX solution [I highly recommend Overleaf], but it's not always up to me...).

    2. Re: Better use Linux directly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dual booting?

      I think you meant Virtualization with hardware pass-through so you can still play your videogames almost native speed.

    3. Re:Better use Linux directly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which doesn't need hardware acceleration and can run in any VM, so you don't have to suffer NTFS

    4. Re:Better use Linux directly by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

      No Shit Sherlock.... I retired in 2010 after nearly 20 years of supporting/using MS products. Around 2011, I decided I was done messing with MS products, and deleted the Windows 7 dualboot-ness of all of my systems back to 100% Linux. Since then, I've been sitting back and watching the shitstorm surrounding the "turd_in_the_punchbowl" that is Windows 10, and how desparate MS seems to be in forcing Windows 10 onto every machine they can. Watching from the sidelines, it occurs to me that Windows 10 itself *is* malware.. Think about it.. It uses the same obfuscation techniques to get itself onto a machine as malware, it sends everything you do on *your* computer to MS. There are endless cases of people who don't want it, but have it forced onto their systems anyway.. Frankly, I have a lot of sympathy for those who either *must* use MS products OR, due to ignorance of alternatives, simply *think* they have to use MS products. Sooooo glad I don't..........

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    5. Re:Better use Linux directly by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      But Linux doesn't run any of my business software.

      You know https://www.winehq.org/, don't you? And if that can't help, noting stops you from using a VM on some desktops (on http://serpro.gov.br/ is that way now - an slow change [of several years] for a big company, since they choosed to only uns Linux on their desktops... [ex-employee here])

    6. Re:Better use Linux directly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to do exactly this - Linux hosting a Win10 VM, and I've stayed with Win8.1 until I get around to learning how. (I have long experience with several Unix variants a long time ago, and I use Cygwin constantly, but not much experience with real Linux, and none with virtualization tech.)

      Can you share any details about your setup, or offer any sage advice?

    7. Re:Better use Linux directly by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      Write your own business software. Why trust some closed source software with your business? That is just like giving all your corporate data too Apple, Google, Facebook, etc.

      FTFY * legaly, here on Brazil, it can't be done (but many local governments already do...)

    8. Re:Better use Linux directly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Why would you want to do that?

      This way, you get the security of Windows and the application set of Linux!

    9. Re:Better use Linux directly by by+(1706743) · · Score: 1

      It was a pretty basic setup. My University has some deal with MS so each student has access to one Windows 10 (and Office) key, with a download link via Microsoft. I just downloaded and set up a vanilla VirtualBox Windows 10 guest. (I believe I just installed VirtualBox from the Debian repositories, nothing fancy.)

      It's not perfect -- audio can be choppy at times, and the 3D acceleration doesn't work (at least on my setup), and the seamless mode doesn't really work (so I just run it fullscreen on one of my workspaces). But performance is completely acceptable for Word, and I have it using only one core and 2GB RAM.

    10. Re:Better use Linux directly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have the disposable odd $100 to buy a new hard drive (and perhaps some cheap controller), so I still have 900GB on ntfs.
      It doesn't support wife murdering, but I can't make use of that feature anyway.

    11. Re:Better use Linux directly by kbrannen · · Score: 1

      Better use Linux directly and put Windows 10 into the trash can...

      I've used Linux since before it hit 1.0 and I'd love to do that. However, at work, I'm forced to use a laptop that boots Win7 for now and I'm told Win10 is coming in the future. So no matter how much I want to use only Linux, I don't have that option at work (at home I use Linux). Therefore, something like this has appeal to me. Historically, I used Cygwin, but if I could have something that feels more native, that would be a good thing.

      Perhaps one day we can convince the IT department that Linux is a viable option for the computer on my desk; but until then, I have to suffer with MS-Windows whether I like it or not.

    12. Re: Better use Linux directly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From an IT point of view, it makes a lot of sense: only few workstations will fall in that case, with simplifies maintenance of the rest greatly

    13. Re:Better use Linux directly by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      Then your laws are broken.

    14. Re: Better use Linux directly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a recent law (fowling Snowden case): many are in a transition situation...

    15. Re: Better use Linux directly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But our current right-wing government (which some call "result of a coup") tends to review this laws...

      * same AC here

    16. Re:Better use Linux directly by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up. If you're running it from inside Windows, then you're still running Windows. This is the annexation of Linux that I've been watching happening with Microsoft: one way or another they want to be the only OS that anyone uses, and this is an example of that; I'll say it again: If you're running Linux from within Windows, you're still running Windows and not Linux. It's just a shell at that point. Eschew Windows entirely and install Linux if you want Linux, among other things it'll have 100% less spyware that way.

    17. Re: Better use Linux directly by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Well you all shouted the year of the Linux Desktop right?

      Well you got it. Insert Tada (windows 3.1) wav file sound

      Unfortunately not exactly as we meant ðY'

      --
      http://saveie6.com/
    18. Re:Better use Linux directly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "it sends everything you do on *your* computer to MS" With this idiotic and patently false accusation. I suspect you retired after 20 years because you never learned how to actually use Windows. However, if you worked on MS platform stack for 20 years I assume you had steady employment and made a good living off of MS products.

    19. Re: Better use Linux directly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So overthrow the assholes who are being bought by outside interests and decide your own fate.

  2. So... Does WSL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    allows one to run netcat?

    1. Re:So... Does WSL by TheCycoONE · · Score: 1

      Yes - plus a bunch of filler to appease the slashdot comment rules.

  3. What does WSL stand for? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't figure it out.

    1. Re:What does WSL stand for? by gigne · · Score: 3, Informative

      Windows Subsystem for Linux

      --
      Signature v3.0, now with 42% less memory usage.
    2. Re:What does WSL stand for? by Sperbels · · Score: 1

      Isn't it really a Linux subsystem for Windows though?

    3. Re:What does WSL stand for? by gigne · · Score: 1

      sure why not. They could qualify it however they want. Either way makes sense.
      I feel personally WSL is the more correct.
      They have a subsystem for their Windows operating system for hosting Linux [clients]

      vs

      There is a Linux subsystem for Windows [Hosts]

      Ahh semantics.

      --
      Signature v3.0, now with 42% less memory usage.
  4. The kind of irony that Alanis Morisette loves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only thing you're not installing is actually the "Linux" part of it -- the Kernel. It's still Windows 10 underneath.

    So, you're just installing the "GNU/" part of the "GNU/Linux" stack. Congratulations on a comprehensive mis-marketing, "Turbo Developers".

    1. Re:The kind of irony that Alanis Morisette loves by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      So, you're just installing the "GNU/" part of the "GNU/Linux" stack.

      What is GNU? Is the common answer no one knows? I think it's no one cares. When people talk about an OS they don't talk about details, version numbers, kernels, user stacks. The marketable name for what people know as Ubuntu, Debian, etc is Linux. That's not mis-marketing. The mis-marketing was done when Linux started becoming popular. Now it's just using the common described name. This begs the question, are you RMS?

    2. Re:The kind of irony that Alanis Morisette loves by somenickname · · Score: 1

      At that point, why not just use Cygwin?

    3. Re:The kind of irony that Alanis Morisette loves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only thing you're not installing is actually the "Linux" part of it -- the Kernel. It's still Windows 10 underneath.

      So, you're just installing the "GNU/" part of the "GNU/Linux" stack. Congratulations on a comprehensive mis-marketing, "Turbo Developers".

      So it is GNU/Windows instead of GNU/Linux.

      That ought to give RMS heartburn. The ultimate non-freedom of Windows mated with the GNU toolset.

    4. Re:The kind of irony that Alanis Morisette loves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am guessing Cygwin is too independent, and doesn't fit into their embrace, extend, extinguish viewpoint.

    5. Re:The kind of irony that Alanis Morisette loves by DeVilla · · Score: 2

      So, you're just installing the "GNU/" part of the "GNU/Linux" stack.

      What is GNU?

      I can tell U what it's not.....

    6. Re:The kind of irony that Alanis Morisette loves by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      +1 Subtle. :-)

  5. A better plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would be more useful to install Windows into Arch Linux so that their distro would actually become usable.

    1. Re:A better plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny and sad when windows users try to criticize GNU+Linux stuff they have no idea about.

  6. misleading title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    makes it sound like you're running linux under windows under linux... my first thought was "Yo Dawg, I heard you like linux..."

  7. Why is it not LSW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux Subsystem for Windows? Yet more marketing hype from Redmond, like they're the ones doing the favor.

  8. Useful, but ... by davidwr · · Score: 1

    ... it opens up another surface for attacks.

    I will probably install something like this at some point, but please don't put this on a non-isolated system without understanding the risks.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  9. Re: This is backwards by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Windows is not mature or safe enough to be used on the bare metal.

    Sure it is.

    Oh, wait, did you mean "... on the bare metal, on the Internet."?

    OK, I see your point now.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  10. So...this is Cygwin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Just saying.

  11. Linux subsystem is stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cygwin has been doing this for decades. I don't understand why people think it is so "revolutionary" that bash and other tools are running on windows

  12. Lemme get this straight by willoughby · · Score: 1

    If Windows isn't bizarre & convoluted enough for you, now you can layer systemd on top of it?

    1. Re:Lemme get this straight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yay! Systemd for Windows!

  13. In other news: it can be done on space! by fbobraga · · Score: 1

    It's written on the Bible!

  14. Re:This is backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Install Debian on the bare metal and then install Windows and Arch in a VM monitor. Arch is not mature or stable enough to be used on the bare metal and Windows sells all your data.

  15. Act now by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    Now, you too can construct a Faberge Egg inside a shitbox with no brakes.

    1. Re:Act now by jenningsthecat · · Score: 1

      Now, you too can construct a Faberge Egg inside a shitbox with no brakes.

      LOL. I came to say pretty much that - my first thought was "you're running a high-speed Maglev train at 300 MPH over a rotting wooden bridge".

      --
      'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
  16. No thanks! by MerlinTheWizard · · Score: 1

    By the way, does that mean that Windows can phone home and send to MS all of your Linux data? Isn't that pretty!

  17. Is that you, RMS? by WD · · Score: 1

    Nit-picking about why Ubuntu isn't "Linux" won't make you many friends.

  18. A page from history,,, by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 2

    For some reason OS/2 for Windows comes to mind...
    The underlying method may differs, but the marketing approach sounded remarkably similar.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  19. Those who cannot remember the past by geekprime · · Score: 2

    'Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.'

    Apparently the devs are too young to remember proven to be real internal Microsoft policy of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    From that article...
    >The variation, "embrace, extend and extinguish", was first introduced in the United States v. Microsoft antitrust trial when a vice president of Intel, Steven
    >McGeady, testified[8] that Microsoft vice president Paul Maritz used the phrase in a 1995 meeting with Intel to describe Microsoft's strategy toward
    >Netscape, Java, and the Internet.[9][10]

    1. Re:Those who cannot remember the past by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Apparently the devs are too young to remember proven to be real internal Microsoft policy of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish

      You are describing an era of Microsoft that was heavily driven by strategy and domination. That Microsoft is long gone. What is left is accountants systematically euthanizing the only cash cows they have left and struggling to stay relevant in any and every market they think will net them $1.

      Don't give Nadella so much credit, he's not even remotely smart enough to pull off Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. He's just looking to drive it down and sell off the assets like he has done with his past endeavours.

  20. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wake me up when your comments arent childish.

  21. Bash on Ubuntu on Windows ? by vikingpower · · Score: 1, Funny

    Why not MS Nano on MS Windows Server on Slack on Cygwin on Win 95 on Bash on Ubuntu on Windows ? I mean - all these CPU cycles and all that unused RAM has to go somewhere, right ? Why not Rocco Sifredi on Kim Kardashin on Sylvester Stallone on Meryl Streep on Chuck Norris ? What say you ?

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:Bash on Ubuntu on Windows ? by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Like playing DOS games on Windows 95 and 98 at full speed and features?
      Believe it or not, sometimes the software "engineers" come up with things that actually work.

  22. Arch on WSL or Msys2? by staalmannen · · Score: 1

    This could be a Msys2 comperitor. Both will have the Arch feel but WSL allows unmodified binaries and no porting needed.

  23. Why Should I Care About ArchLinux? by speedplane · · Score: 1

    This is the third slashdot article on ArchLinux in the past year. I don't see this much publicity being devoted the hundreds of other Linux distros out there. Why is Slashdot giving so much play to ArchLinux? Is there anything special about it or do they just have a good PR team?

    --
    Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
    1. Re:Why Should I Care About ArchLinux? by rat7307 · · Score: 1

      Because Arch is awesome.

      (Yes, I'm part of the Arch master race)

      --
      Burma?
    2. Re:Why Should I Care About ArchLinux? by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      I really hope this is a Poe's Law situation and you're being sarcastic.

      I guarantee you in the last year /. has done at least 3 articles each on Ubuntu, Mint, Red Hat, and Gentoo (and OpenBSD and FreeBSD), and at least 1 on various others. I see 2 or 3 Mint articles just since the beginning of September.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    3. Re:Why Should I Care About ArchLinux? by speedplane · · Score: 1

      I guarantee you in the last year /. has done at least 3 articles each on Ubuntu, Mint, Red Hat, and Gentoo (and OpenBSD and FreeBSD), and at least 1 on various others.

      Ubuntu, Red Hat, FreeBSD, and Gentoo have been popular for long enough to deserve the attention. But both Arch (and Mint too) seem like upstarts. Before broadcasting every release, I think we should see more articles explaining their benefits.

      --
      Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
    4. Re:Why Should I Care About ArchLinux? by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      Gentoo
      Developer Gentoo Foundation
      OS family Unix-like
      Working state Current
      Source model Open source
      Initial release 31 March 2002; 14 years ago

      Ubuntu
      Developer Canonical Ltd, Ubuntu community
      OS family Linux
      Working state Current
      Source model Open source (with exceptions)[1]
      Initial release 20 October 2004; 11 years ago

      Linux Mint
      Developer Clement Lefebvre, Jamie Boo Birse, Kendall Weaver, and community[1]
      OS family Unix-like
      Working state Current
      Source model Open source
      Initial release 27 August 2006; 10 years ago

      Arch Linux
      Developer Aaron Griffin and others[a]
      OS family Unix-like
      Working state Current
      Source model Open source
      Initial release March 11, 2002; 14 years ago

      Apparently Arch has actually been around 2 years longer than Ubuntu, and about 20 days than Gentoo.
      And Mint is only 2 years out of 12 younger.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
  24. Doesn't that sort of defeat the purpose ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't the whole point of using GNU/Linux that you don't have to use ugh... Windows... anymore ?!?

  25. Bring back Xenix!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, you kids, get off my fukkin lawn!

  26. The NeeeEeeeeEEw M$! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You are describing an era of Microsoft that was heavily driven by strategy and domination. That Microsoft is long gone."

    IMO this is the same M$ always and forever:

    Falco: I have been told of a certain sea snake which has a very unusual method of attracting its prey. It will lie at the bottom of the ocean as if wounded. Then its enemies will approach, and yet it will lie quite still. And then its enemies will take little bites of it, and yet it remains still.

    Commodus: So, we will lie still, and let our enemies come to us and nibble.

    - Gladiator (2000)

    Ubuntu? Arch? I'll install them if I want to, M$, but I want nothing to do with your company AND Apple.

  27. OMG! Do You Know What This Could Mean? by Motard · · Score: 1

    No, really, what does this mean? Why would I buy a Windows machine and run Linux on it?

  28. Guiness Book of Records challenge by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

    How many layers deep can you get...

    * Virtualbox VM on linux
    * Windows 10 in the Virtualbox VM on linux
    * subsystem for linux on Windows 10 in the Virtualbox VM on linux
    * Virtualbox on linux on subsystem for linux on Windows 10 in the Virtualbox VM on linux
    * etc, etc

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    1. Re:Guiness Book of Records challenge by by+(1706743) · · Score: 1

      If it's all on *NIX, I know this would be pretty easy to do (probably not difficult with Windows, I just don't know how). Just have the VM, upon booting up, download an image of itself and spool up a new instance. Would perhaps need to take care that the memory and storage allocated for each additional VM is somewhat smaller than the host VM, but this is easily scriptable.

  29. die, ms die by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pls see above

  30. Windows Subsystem for Linux runs Linux? by allo · · Score: 1

    I guess you're speaking about a Linux Subsystem on Windows.