3 ms·

So, I assume soon there'll be a pure-C kernel fork and some distributions adopting it. And I'd switch to that.

• orf 5y ago
  Why?
  • IYasha 5y ago
    Because there are many people who oppose mandatory Rust integration. For various reasons, not just plain dislike of Rust itself. And, for example, there's a Libre Kernel that is blob free and it has its users. There might be an audience for Rustless Kernel too.
    • samhw 5y ago
      I think they meant "why?" as in "what reason do they have?", rather than "do there exist people who think that?". I don't really care what tool was used to generate my assembly, and the kind of Rust that will be written in a kernel context[0] will - I guarantee you - produce virtually identical assembly to C. [0] i.e. no standard library ('no_std'), no unwinding panics, no dynamically sized types, &c.
• bitcharmer 5y ago
  It might, and if so you will switch but a very small minority of Linux users ever have the need to compile it themselves and out of that small minority only a small fraction will migrate to alternatives over this. I see Rust as a replacement for C long term. From this perspective it's absolutely ok to have a transition period (years in fact) where there are multiple toolchains used to build the kernel.