Comment by dralley
2 days ago
There are multiple kernels written in Rust already. Writing another one wouldn't be interesting.
The point of R4L is that people want to write drivers for Linux in Rust. The corporate sponsors that are involved also are interested in writing drivers for Linux in Rust. Sure, Google could rebase Android on top of RedoxOS or Fuschia and Red Hat could spend a decade writing Linux Subsystem for RedoxOS, but neither want to do those things. They want to write drivers, for Linux, in Rust.
Telling them to write a new kernel is a bit like telling them they should go write a new package manager. It's a completely different thing from what they actually care about.
[flagged]
Both Linus and Greg KH were actively supportive of the project and remain so. Several of the R4L developers were long-term linux devs long before the project started (e.g. David Arlie). There are lots of current maintainers who aren't directly involved with R4L that still have a positive and optimistic outlook about it long-term. Just because there are a handful of maintainers are vocally in opposition does not mean that is the representative opinion.
This is such an absurd, content-free argument, which is not surprising given how you closed it.
That's a good reputation to have, for most people
Ah yes, woke, the word used to describe something disliked.
That's a misrepresentation of what's actually going on in the R4L project. Volunteers are enabling support for it within the kernel to allow for rust drivers in a way that explicitly does not require existing maintainers to change how they maintain their parts of the kernel. Maintaining rust support and the APIs consumed by Rust is the job of R4L and doesn't require any work from the existing maintainers who are allowed to make changes to their C that breaks Rust where the Rust will then be adjusted accordingly.