Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 08:22:32 -0800 From: Enji Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> To: Eric McCorkle <eric@metricspace.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Speculative: Rust for base system components Message-ID: <361CCB81-AEB6-4EAC-9604-CD8F4C63948C@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <e954a12f-5d23-7a3f-c29b-c93e1250965c@metricspace.net> References: <201901021829.x02IT4Kc064169@slippy.cwsent.com> <e954a12f-5d23-7a3f-c29b-c93e1250965c@metricspace.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Jan 3, 2019, at 04:46, Eric McCorkle <eric@metricspace.net> wrote: > > On 1/2/19 1:29 PM, Cy Schubert wrote: > >>> I'm all for discussion and criticism of this, that's why I posted it, >>> but I don't think these kinds of false equivalences are helpful. >> >> Actually it is helpful. Without a solid proposal of a new feature or >> userland utility to be imported into base that requires the support of >> a language not already in base, the implication of the original email >> starting this thread was to rewrite FreeBSD using rust. > > That doesn't represent what I wrote at all, and is bordering on a > strawman argument. Nobody to my knowledge is suggesting rewriting > everything, nor would that be possible. > >> In reality we should rely more on ports. Over the years this business >> has become more fragmented. Each year we see new languages being >> developed and used. Importing new shiny objects into base is >> unsustainable. IMO the momentum is behind containerization, >> specifically kubernetes and docker-like containers. That is today. The >> next year or two will introduce new technologies and shiny objects >> which we will likely need to introduce here to remain relevant. We >> should be looking to reduce the footprint of base, introduce new >> technologies in ports (ports are much easier to build from scratch, >> maintain, and update than base). Additionally the idea of meta-ports >> that install groups of packages would make building purpose-built >> systems a breeze for our user base, similar to what anaconda does, like >> a FreeBSD based LAMP (FAMP) stack package that installs all the >> necessary bits with one pkg install command. > > And that seems to be the point of convergence in all this, which is fine > by me. I was looking to discuss the options and figure out the best way > forward. Going back to my previous statement, I think writing a service monitor (to work alongside init and rc) in modern C++/rust would be a good item to undertake. I’d be willing to do this with someone else, as a research project/to demo how rust could be used. Given prior comments about rust binary sizes and the fact that the default linking option is mostly static, a “mission critical binary” like this (or rescue?) would be a good candidate for rust. Cheers, -Enji PS let’s call the discussion mostly closed and start working on prototypes instead of beating a dead horse further.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?361CCB81-AEB6-4EAC-9604-CD8F4C63948C>