Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Installation "with any rootfs" impossible on arm laptops without virtualization #92

Closed
0cyn opened this issue Apr 5, 2021 · 2 comments
Labels

Comments

@0cyn
Copy link

0cyn commented Apr 5, 2021

Snapdragon 550 chips (and others, i'm sure) aren't likely going to see the same virtualization support that new chips have unless someone else writes the drivers. Windows itself also doesn't support this.

I wouldn't say you need to support this, but it's taken me about a week to figure out manually, and others on pre 800/c snapdragon chips may also appreciate it.

Error: (virtualization isn't enabled, ofc)

PS C:\Users\krita\Downloads> .\Launcher_arm64.exe
Using: C:\Users\krita\Downloads\rootfs.tar.gz
Installing...
ERROR:Installation Failed!
HRESULT:0x80370102

I was able to circumvent this by manually importing the rootfs in WSL and working out how to get wsldl working with that.

dl: https://cloud-images.ubuntu.com/groovy/current/groovy-server-cloudimg-arm64-wsl.rootfs.tar.gz
wsl --import Ubuntu2010 C:\Users\krita\Ubuntu .\rootfs.tar.gz --version 1

an option or envar to force WSL version 1 (before install) or automate the above process in some way would be neat.

@yuk7 yuk7 added the bug label Apr 6, 2021
@yuk7
Copy link
Owner

yuk7 commented Apr 6, 2021

Thank you for reporting issue
I'll investigate about it

@0cyn
Copy link
Author

0cyn commented Apr 6, 2021

It's worth noting wsl.exe itself has this same issue, so I don't know if it's a bug as much as a feature request.

Let me know if you need any testing done.

@yuk7 yuk7 closed this as completed Jul 15, 2021
@yuk7 yuk7 reopened this Jul 15, 2021
@yuk7 yuk7 added enhancement and removed bug labels Jul 15, 2021
@yuk7 yuk7 added invalid and removed enhancement labels Aug 28, 2021
@yuk7 yuk7 closed this as completed Aug 28, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants