Asahi Linux lead developer Hector Martin resigns from Linux kernel

Post by pelagicAustral » Sat, Feb 08, 2025, 1:56 AM UTC

lonjil wrote: post #410

alberth wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Linus’ immediate reply https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/CAHk-=wi=ZmP2=TmHsFSU... (not taking either side, just interesting to read the reply)

I find this reply interesting. Linus says that what matters is technical stuff, but even before the social media brigading, the whole thread was nothing but non-technical drama. So why is Linus focused only on that and not Hellwig's behavior?

Post by roca » Sat, Feb 08, 2025, 1:59 AM UTC

wahern wrote: post #424

tadfisher wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you feel the same about Make, Device Tree, KConfig, Python, the myriad of machine-specific assembly, POSIX shell, Perl, and every other non-C language currently in the code base?

That's a false equivalency. All of those languages are integrated through strong semantic and concrete abstractions (e.g. file system I/O or GCC interfaces) that evolve, if at all, very slowly. Some, like assembly, are necessary concessions, and are exceptions that prove the rule--developers prefer GCC builtins if available, for example. The problem with Rust in the kernel is that the kernel has historically eschewed…

Post by KennyBlanken » Sat, Feb 08, 2025, 2:04 AM UTC

artyom wrote: post #201

gary_0 wrote: post #27

The Rust drama is an uncommon failure of leadership for Torvalds. Instead of decisively saying "no, never" or "yes, make it so," he has consistently equivocated on the Rust issue. Given the crisis of confidence among a sizeable (and very vocal) contingent of the Linux community, that decision has backfired horribly. And it's quite out of character for Linus not to have a blazingly clear opinion. (We all know his stan…

> an uncommon failure of leadership for Torvalds Exactly the point. IMHO the one and only thing that made Linux successful as a project is Linus' strong leadership - which has been criticized ad-nauseam over the years; yet it's the only thing that yields results. So in the specific instances (like this one) where he's not decisively, unequivocally, and even harshly saying "yes" or "no" to something, the community sho…

Post by roca » Sat, Feb 08, 2025, 2:08 AM UTC

arghwhat wrote: post #68

mplewis9z wrote: post #10

Marcan certainly can be abrasive (I mean lol, so can Linus), but all the things he points out in the message below are 100% valid - I highly recommend for anyone here to try to contribute something even very small and logical to the Linux kernel or git (which use similar processes), it’s an eye-opening experience that’s incredibly unapproachable, frustrating, and demoralizing. https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/2…

Having contributed a few times, I'd rate it as similar (sometimes much easier!) than contributing to Firefox and Chromium. That is to say that it is indeed extremely time-consuming and frustrating, but when compared to projects of the same scale it does not necessarily come out as more time-consuming or more frustrating - this will never be a small team collaborating on a random Github repo. A simple "swap out X work…

Post by tatetian16 » Sat, Feb 08, 2025, 2:11 AM UTC

msgilligan wrote: post #430

AndyKelley wrote: post #422

I've been saying this for years now: the rust4linux folks are putting so much effort into trying to upstream their work, seems like they should instead put that effort into maintaining a fork. Arguably it would be less hours spent porting than arguing with humans. Certainly more pleasant! Then one of two things will happen: * Rust will prove its worth and their fork will be the better operating system. Distros will s…

I think a fork with a mission to aggressively rewrite the kernel into Rust would be a great experiment. Lessons learned could be applied to the more mainstream C/Rust kernel(s). Has anyone done that?