• MajorHavoc
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    “if you’re a Linux expert, this article isn’t for you. You’re probably already using Debian if you use WSL”

    As a Linux expert - yep! My distro choice under WSL is Debian, for the same reasons shared in the article.

    • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      What reasons? They gave reasons? They just said that windows fixes the flaws Debian has which is quite the “compliment”.

      • MajorHavoc
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I mean, I didn’t read terribly closely, because I already made my choice.

        My reason is that the benefits of Ubuntu over Debian are most noticeable in the GUI, which WSL doesn’t contain.

        In contrast, I find the benefits of Debian over Ubuntu to be most noticeable on the command line, which is all we get in WSL anyway.

        To me this is some solid advice that I already knew.

        I think there’s also a fair assumption by the author that anyone running WSL isn’t a total Linux newbie. I personally, think of WSL as an intermediate skill level way to run Linux, because WSL is still - frankly - a huge pain in the ass, when contrasted with trying out a bootable USB drive, and then only gives the command line, which is also a very limited way to experience Linux. (I think it will get better, but today WSL is not a way that I recommend to newbies to try out Linux.)

        • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          The main use of wsl is often for things like docker, not as a “Linux desktop”. Microsoft has been getting killed by Linux in server environments. This lets developers stay on windows and build containers.