• catloaf@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 hours ago

    It sounds like he tried that, and nobody with authority responded until he went outside the list. Even now, Linus hasn’t actually answered the question of whether more rust code should be allowed.

    • h4x0r@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 hours ago

      No offense, but reading through the comments it’s apparent you’re not very familiar with systems programming nor linux development. This is a common problem with vocal ‘rustaceans’, rust is their hammer regardless of the domain.

      Although considering rust is prudent, there are still a ton of advantages to using C for systems programming. It is not a binary choice, there are pros and cons, and every project should choose what aligns with their priorities.

      No one has ever stated that linux will be in the kernel. It was ‘go ahead and give it a shot’, which includes convincing maintainers to accept your patches. Linus has delegated trust to subsystems maintainers and an established process.

      Hellwig could have been more tactful, but like it or not, arguments against a cross-language codebase have merit. Framing it as a ‘clear confession of sabotage of the r4l project’, attempting to weaponize the CoC, and trying to drum up an army via social media was all out of line.

      Success was never a given, if they want r4l to succeed then they have to get patches approved and crying wolf ain’t gonna cut it.

    • Yozul@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I don’t know how “whether more rust code should be allowed” is even a question. What, do you think they’re going to just cut all the rust developers off or something? Linus has always been a move slow and don’t break things kinda guy. Why should allowing rust into the kernel suddenly change that now? What is there to even answer?

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Well, the rust devs are trying to add more rust code, and the dma maintainer rejected it because it was was written in rust. Thus, the question.

        • Yozul@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 hours ago

          The dma maintainer wants all the code he’s in charge of to be stuff he likes to work with. Whether you agree with that or not, that has absolutely nothing to do with Linus Torvalds allowing more rust code in the kernel.

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        So he won’t answer on-list. He won’t respond to off-list. I don’t blame marcan for getting frustrated.

        • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          Yeah, I don’t blame him for being frustrated. I definitely empathize with him here. I don’t know about the culture around committing to the kernal, but maybe it would be better to fork and make the case with action?

          • catloaf@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Forking the Linux kernel is unlikely to go anywhere.

            There is Redox, a Unix-like whole OS implemented in Rust, though I don’t know if being able to run unmodified Linux binaries is one of their goals. It looks like they’re expecting most software to be ported.