1. 31
  1.  

  2. 20

    Fyi: This article does not contain much new information and just a few quotes from Linus Torvalda and GKH.

    1. 11

      And it’s from 2021-03-21, ie. around the time the Rust support commits going to linux-next were in the news. I’m sure many are hoping for an update but we’ll have to wait for that.

      1. 3

        I don’t think an update will give anything substantial, Linus has already said it will be used for device drivers only, not the kernel core. Unless that changes, the only news will be the actual drivers that ship.

        1. 3

          A release would be substantial news.

    2. 4

      it may replace GNU Coreutils

      Is this going to result in a 4MB ls command? I’m still don’t totally understand how Rust publishes shared libraries and integrates with shares libraries without shims via crates. It still seems like Go: packaging every dependency together like a system-tool version of Java.

      The other major point of concern should be licensing. clang + llvm + rust base tools means getting away from the GPL. Will we see commercial Linux distributions in the future with no real free equivalents; where only the kernel is released and none of the underlying tooling? The Darwin/BSD of Linux distros?

      1. 3

        Don’t we see the latter already? Oracle Linux et al? And isn’t Darwin and example of why Linux itself would remain free? Also I don’t think using clang, llvm, etc. will change much about a project’s license. The reverse where GCC is used also didn’t seem to have a huge effect on BSD licensed code.

        Also I don’t think the Go / Java comparison is fair, cause with Java you will still need to install Java itself, which on itself pulls in a huge amount of third party software as dependencies.

        Also static linking is possible in C as well and dynamic linking I think is possible in Go by now and I think in Rust? If that’s what you meant.

        I still agree on file sizes though. And then your Docker base images will be gigabytes. ;)

        1. 3

          I’m not sure this is much of an issue. Open/FreeBSD are licensed with similar licenses to most of the rust ecosystem, but there aren’t really fully commercial versions of these. Besides, nobody’s stopping you from writing GPL code in Rust, it’s just that MIT is a more common license.

          1. 1

            There’s certainly commercial systems based off FreeBSD, IIRC Sony have been using it as the base for PlayStations for years. There’s also several storage and firewall vendors who’ve built their commercial systems on FreeBSD, and not to forget Darwin/macOS itself using much of the freebsd user land.

          2. 3

            Will we see commercial Linux distributions in the future with no real free equivalents; where only the kernel is released and none of the underlying tooling? The Darwin/BSD of Linux distros?

            It’s called Android and it’s the most widely deployed Linux distro. Okay, AOSP exists, and you can build it, but most Android software depends on various Google proprietary services.

            1. 1

              By “commercial” I assume you mean non-free or proprietary? There are already many commercial distros and used to be many more :)