Comment by vablings

>One perspective is that Rust appears to be forced into the Linux kernel through harassment and pressure. Instead of Rust being pulled, carefully, organically and friendly, and while taking good care of any significant objections. Objections like, getting the relevant features from unstable Rust into stable Rust, or getting a second compiler like gccrs (Linux kernel uses gcc for C) fully up and running, or ensuring that there is a specification (the specification donated by/from Ferrous Systems, might have significant issues), or prioritizing the kernel higher than Rust.

On the flip side there have been many downright sycophants of only C in the Linux kernel and have done every possible action to throttle and sideline the Rust for Linux movement.

There have been multiple very public statements made by other maintainers that they actively reject Rust in the kernel rather than coming in with open hearts and minds.

Why are active maintainers rejecting parts of code that are under the remit of responsibility?