3 ms·
i’ve looked at it briefly. i do not need or want it, and that is fine. what is important, is to keep the kernel tree simple and understandable. that means minim
by b20000 5y ago
i’ve looked at it briefly. i do not need or want it, and that is fine. what is important, is to keep the kernel tree simple and understandable. that means minimizing the number of tools and languages involved. which means not introducing rust.
- dagmx 5y ago> keep it simple and understandable Yes. Rust helps with that because as a language it simplifies avoiding huge classes of vulnerabilities. Rust simplifies it for the developers by moving part of the mental model of the developer into the compiler.
- b20000 5y agoi don’t care about vulnerabilities. it is very annoying that everyone assumes that linux is only used for applications where security matters. plenty of devices using linux do not need to be secure and forcing rust onto the entire linux kernel community because of a vulnerability argument is stupid and will only make it harder for people to use linux in a project.
- dagmx 5y agoThis is just absurd. It's like arguing against seatbelts as a default in cars because you might sit in your driveway most of the time.
- LtdJorge 5y agoMost Linux installations are cloud servers. So yes, Linux really needs to be secure.
- b20000 5y agoi think that has changed over the past 20 years. linux is now everywhere and not just on servers in data centers. and this requirement is not a valid reason to force rust onto all device creators who choose linux.