Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Moss: a Rust Linux-compatible kernel in 26,000 lines of code

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 163 posts

Re: Moss: a Rust Linux-compatible kernel in 26,000 lines of code

#31

Post by mnau »

stingraycharles wrote: post #16
marty-oehme wrote: post #10

Very cool project! I do have to admit - looking far, far into the future - I am a bit scared of a Linux ABI-compatible kernel with an MIT license.

Why?

Because unlike most other functionality, you generally need hw specs or cooperation to write drivers (see Nvidia GSP).

Anyone can write Photoshop (provided reasonable resources). The problem is going to be proprietary file format and compatibility with the ecosystem. It's same with hardware, except several orders of magnitude worse.

Re: Moss: a Rust Linux-compatible kernel in 26,000 lines of code

#33

Post by andrewl-hn »

hexagonal-sun wrote: post #2

Hello! For the past 8 months, or so, I've been working on a project to create a Linux-compatible kernel in nothing but Rust and assembly. I finally feel as though I have enough written that I'd like to share it with the community! I'm currently targeting the ARM64 arch, as that's what I know best. It runs on qemu as well as various dev boards that I've got lying around (pi4, jetson nano, AMD Kria, imx8, etc). It has…

> no networking support

Would something like Smoltcp be of help here? https://github.com/smoltcp-rs/smoltcp

Great project either way!

How do you decide which sys calls to work on? Is is based on what the user space binaries demand?

Re: Moss: a Rust Linux-compatible kernel in 26,000 lines of code

#34

Post by andrewl-hn »

viraptor wrote: post #17
marty-oehme wrote: post #10

Very cool project! I do have to admit - looking far, far into the future - I am a bit scared of a Linux ABI-compatible kernel with an MIT license.

Too late? https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/linuxemu/

Also, AFAIK SmartOS / Ilumos has had a combat layer for it, too.

Re: Moss: a Rust Linux-compatible kernel in 26,000 lines of code

#36

Post by phkahler »

hexagonal-sun wrote: post #2

Hello! For the past 8 months, or so, I've been working on a project to create a Linux-compatible kernel in nothing but Rust and assembly. I finally feel as though I have enough written that I'd like to share it with the community! I'm currently targeting the ARM64 arch, as that's what I know best. It runs on qemu as well as various dev boards that I've got lying around (pi4, jetson nano, AMD Kria, imx8, etc). It has…

Love the MIT license. If this were further along we could use this as the foundation of our business without having to "give back" device drivers and other things.

Re: Moss: a Rust Linux-compatible kernel in 26,000 lines of code

#37

Post by bfrog »

phkahler wrote: post #36
hexagonal-sun wrote: post #2

Hello! For the past 8 months, or so, I've been working on a project to create a Linux-compatible kernel in nothing but Rust and assembly. I finally feel as though I have enough written that I'd like to share it with the community! I'm currently targeting the ARM64 arch, as that's what I know best. It runs on qemu as well as various dev boards that I've got lying around (pi4, jetson nano, AMD Kria, imx8, etc). It has…

Love the MIT license. If this were further along we could use this as the foundation of our business without having to "give back" device drivers and other things.

This should be the sort of red flag to take note of. There’s an LLVM fork for every esoteric architecture now and this sort of thinking will lead to never being able to run your own software on your own hardware again. A reversion to the dark ages of computing.

Re: Moss: a Rust Linux-compatible kernel in 26,000 lines of code

#38

Post by nickpsecurity »

phkahler wrote: post #36
hexagonal-sun wrote: post #2

Hello! For the past 8 months, or so, I've been working on a project to create a Linux-compatible kernel in nothing but Rust and assembly. I finally feel as though I have enough written that I'd like to share it with the community! I'm currently targeting the ARM64 arch, as that's what I know best. It runs on qemu as well as various dev boards that I've got lying around (pi4, jetson nano, AMD Kria, imx8, etc). It has…

Love the MIT license. If this were further along we could use this as the foundation of our business without having to "give back" device drivers and other things.

MIT licensed code is a gift. A gift indeed doesn't require the recipient to give back anything related to the gift.

A "gift" requiring GPL-like conditions isn't really a gift in the common sense. It's more like a contractual agreement with something provided and specific, non-negotiable obligations. They're giving while also asserting control over others' lives, hoping for a specific outcome. That's not just a gift.

People doing MIT license are often generous enough where the code is a gift to everyone. They don't try to control their lives or societal outcomes with extra obligations. They're just giving. So, I'm grateful to them for both OSS and business adaptations of their gifts.

Re: Moss: a Rust Linux-compatible kernel in 26,000 lines of code

#39

Post by imiric »

bfrog wrote: post #37
phkahler wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Love the MIT license. If this were further along we could use this as the foundation of our business without having to "give back" device drivers and other things.

This should be the sort of red flag to take note of. There’s an LLVM fork for every esoteric architecture now and this sort of thinking will lead to never being able to run your own software on your own hardware again. A reversion to the dark ages of computing.

Seriously.

To the author: kudos for the interesting project, but please strongly consider a copyleft license moving forward.

Re: Moss: a Rust Linux-compatible kernel in 26,000 lines of code

#40

Post by imiric »

nickpsecurity wrote: post #38
phkahler wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Love the MIT license. If this were further along we could use this as the foundation of our business without having to "give back" device drivers and other things.

MIT licensed code is a gift. A gift indeed doesn't require the recipient to give back anything related to the gift. A "gift" requiring GPL-like conditions isn't really a gift in the common sense. It's more like a contractual agreement with something provided and specific, non-negotiable obligations. They're giving while also asserting control over others' lives, hoping for a specific outcome. That's not just a gift.…

A gift where the recipient can remove the freedoms that they've been enjoying themselves is a bad deal for ensuring those freedoms are available to everyone. A permissive license is a terrible idea for a F/LOSS kernel.

This is the paradox of tolerance, essentially.

Also, seeing F/LOSS as a "gift" is an awful way of looking at it.

Post reply on HN