The previous impl used the tech that became WSL1, and I'm not sure you can in practice bypass the Linux syscall. WSL1 is now deprecated and I don't think it is actually reasonable to try to follow the fast paced dev of Linux, even more so since a few years. So the WSL2 approach seems perfectly fine.
> I don't think it is actually reasonable to try to follow the fast paced dev of Linux
That's not quite the reason why it's deprecated. Microsoft can emulate a stable kernel's ABI for a long time before needing to update, so it's not the "fast paced dev" of Linux. The problem that Windows simply can't 100% emulate the behavior of all syscalls with the way NT functions. As a result, WSL1 will always be a subset of the syscalls available on WSL2. It won't matter if they don't keep up with new ones, however it starts to make WSL1 less useful over time.
WSL1 is _not_ deprecated. it is just recommended you use WSL2 since theres a wide range of incompatibilities in WSL1 with various Linux tools. However if all you need is a basic toolchain in some ways it’s superior to WSL2 because it doesn’t require a VM.
You are right although in my mind it is frozen, and given Linux continues to move, I see WSL1 has almost deprecated.
For a few years it may continue to be useful, however soon enough you won't be able to run a modern distro on WSL1. At this point it would actually be defacto deprecated.
Thus probably nobody, neither MS nor 3rd parties, will base a medium/long term plan on WSL1 now. It's already legacy tech; still maintained for essential things (security, etc.), but already legacy.
