350
Bootloaders are overrated, use efistub instead ๐
Please remove my bootloader one last time!
Most of the time, your grub is still there, even the link on your efi partiton. Only the evivars in uefi need to be reminded of their existance far too often.
One of the many reasons why I still boot in legacy.
Windows did an update once that messed up so bad that at least until I booted into a live USB, my bios couldn't find grub or windows lol, then from the live USB I just chrooted in and reinstalled grub.
How does the wsl load the OS btw?
Wsl2? It's a VM. As for wsl1... Not sure, mb smth wine-ish.
The way WSL1 worked is actually quite interesting: The NT kernel always had the capability to run multiple subsystems, with Win32 only being one of them and there were subsystems available for OS/2, POSIX and later UNIX. WSL1 was pretty much a revival of that feature. So WSL1 is indeed somewhat like Wine, but making heavy use of some features built into the kernel. So yeah, no real boot process happening.
(Also it's kinda stupid that the 'S' in WSL2 still stands for 'subsystem', despite not using that feature anymore.)
I liked the WSL1 approach better. I find it ironic that the Windows kernel lacks so many useful features that it simply wasn't possible to properly implement things like cgroups on top of it, so they just gave up and ran Linux in a VM for WSL2
Defaults were updated to systemd-boot
this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2023
350 points (94.2% liked)
linuxmemes
19717 readers
396 users here now
I use Arch btw
Sister communities:
- LemmyMemes: Memes
- LemmyShitpost: Anything and everything goes.
- RISA: Star Trek memes and shitposts
Community rules
- Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
- Be civil
- Post Linux-related content
- No recent reposts
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS