Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:19:55 -0700 From: Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> To: Tomoaki AOKI <junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, Aleksandr Fedorov <wigneddoom@yandex.ru>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org>, "meka@tilda.center" <meka@tilda.center> Subject: Re: The Case for Rust (in the base system) Message-ID: <CAOtMX2ho7b9VOnABzdRvWn_gNmz3_V1Ac1Rmo-XRC72sPTttKQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20240121110611.af567b0ac3a8fd8593ffcb7f@dec.sakura.ne.jp> References: <CAOtMX2hAUiWdGPtpaCJLPZB%2Bj2yzNw5DSjUmkwTi%2B%2BmyemehCA@mail.gmail.com> <1673801705774097@mail.yandex.ru> <CANCZdfpqWgvV_RCvVO_pvTrmajQFspW%2BQ9TM_Ok3JrXZAfeAfA@mail.gmail.com> <20240121110611.af567b0ac3a8fd8593ffcb7f@dec.sakura.ne.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 7:06=E2=80=AFPM Tomoaki AOKI <junchoon@dec.sakura.n= e.jp> wrote: > > On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:31:23 -0700 > Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 11:45=E2=80=AFAM Aleksandr Fedorov <wigneddoom@= yandex.ru> > > wrote: > > > > > What about external dependencies? > > > > > > https://github.com/Axcient/freebsd-nfs-exporter/blob/master/Cargo.tom= l#L19 > > > https://github.com/asomers/gstat-rs/blob/master/gstat/src/main.rs#L20 > > > > > > Is there any plan for which crates we should take into the base syste= m? > > > > > > We have had C++ in base for many years, but I don=E2=80=99t see any g= ood libraries > > > for CLI, logging, JSON, etc. > > > > > > > > > https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustc/platform-support.html#tier-1-with-hos= t-tools > > > > > > Where is the support for Freebsd as a primary platform? ARM, RISC-V, > > > Power? Should we rewrite devd? > > > > > > I think we need to start by providing official repositories (e.g > > > git.FreeBSD.org/rust.git or git.FreeBSD.org/go.git) > > > for different languages that include stable bindings to the system AP= I: > > > - sysctl > > > - libgeom > > > - libifconfig > > > - netgraph > > > - jail > > > - etc. > > > > > > So that it=E2=80=99s not just some anonymous on crates.io that repres= ents these > > > bindings, but our community. > > > Officially, with support for a stable ABI for releases, security patc= hes, > > > etc. > > > > > > After this, it will be possible to think about which components to in= clude > > > in the base system. > > > > > > I would be glad to see a more modern language than C in the database,= but > > > I=E2=80=99m afraid that it will be like with C++, > > > that we will get a couple of daemons and utilities and that=E2=80=99s= all. > > > > > > > These are all good questions that need good answers, though necessarily= to > > get started. > > > > But the other question that occured to me after my last posting was "Wh= at > > about build integration?" > > How much of the rust automation do we take in vs how much do we drive f= rom > > a future bsd.rust.mk. > > I can sketch out bsd.rust.mk (to pick an arbitrary name, we'd likely ne= ed > > one for what we traditionally > > think of as libraries (which may or may not map 1:1 onto crates: we cou= ld > > have c callable libraries > > written in rust in the future, for example) and one for binaries. > > Initially, though, if we go with the > > 'make rust tests possible' then we'd likely need the appropriate packag= es > > installed for whatever > > dependencies we'd have in the tests. This would give us a taste for wha= t > > we'd need to do for > > base, I'd think. Once we had that notion, I can easily see there needin= g to > > be some sort of > > rust bindings for ATF/kyua as one of the first libraries / crates that > > would test that aspect of > > the build system. That all would be up to the people writing the tests = in > > rust, I'd imagine. > > > > While I could jot out the basics of this integration (so one could just= add > > the rust > > tools to a subdir or subdirs, include the bsd.rust.mk or whatever and t= hen > > it would build > > if rust is enabled, and would emit a warning it was skipped because rus= t > > was disabled). > > We'd find out if this is workable or not and iterate from there. But th= at > > would also require > > active participation from the rust advocates to make it a reality: I ca= n > > put together the > > build infrastructure for the disabled case, but likely can't on my own = do > > the rust enabled > > case. I'd be happy to work with someone to do that, but I'm not going t= o be > > able to do > > that myself: my need for rust is slight, my knowledge of rust is weak, = etc. > > Working with > > someone (or ideally several someones), though it could become reality. = So > > please contact > > me if you'd like to work on this. > > > > Warner > > One way to go could be moving programs rewritten with rust to ports. > There are some programs (not in rust, though) moved to ports, like rcs. I've already done this with a few, though I didn't delete the C versions from base. usr.bin/gstat =3D> sysutils/gstat-rs tools/regression/fsx =3D> devel/fsx > > Currently, it would not be so realistic, but once we completely switch > to pkgbase, IIUC, programs in base can sanely depemd on ports programs, > excluding kernel and fundamental libraries. > > As non-rust consumers of graphics/librsvg2-rust can sanely link with > it, I assume kmods in ports written in rust can kldload'ed sanely. > This could be a good starting point. > > And would be not all, but test for rust libraries could be implemented > with C/C++ or any other language suitable, if the rust libraries can > sanely linked with test codes. Yes, if the Rust library implements a C interface, which most don't. > > Am I wrong?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOtMX2ho7b9VOnABzdRvWn_gNmz3_V1Ac1Rmo-XRC72sPTttKQ>