Just run a Linux hyper-v vm. That's what WSL2 is doing under the hood anyway. I run it this way and it's great. I have windows terminal auto ssh into it. Performance is great. And using the X server x410 on the windows side gui performance is fantastic (though no hardware acceleration) because instead of ssh tunneling x410 suports AF_VSOCK for the x socket, which hyper-v supports for performance as good as a domain socket on the same machine.
* Sparse & light - they only allocate resources from the host when needed, and release them back to the host when freed * Fast - it can boot a WSL distro from cold in < 2s * Transitional - these lightweight VMs are designed to run for up to days-weeks at a time
Full Hyper-V VMs aim to (generally) grab all the resources they can and keep hold of those resources as long as possible in case they're needed. Full VMs are designed to run for months-years at a time.
WSL's VMs are MUCH less impactful on the host - FWIW, I run 2-3 WSL distros at a time on my 4 year old 16GB Surface Pro 4 and don't even notice that they're running.
I imagine this will be addressed, but claims of lightweight seem exaggerated?
But even more on my mind is the impact on the windows host. Is it running as a guest under hyper v? What's the overhead?