Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2018 20:56:46 -0800 From: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> To: Peter Jeremy <peter@rulingia.com>, Igor Mozolevsky <igor@hybrid-lab.co.uk> Cc: Hackers freeBSD <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Speculative: Rust for base system components Message-ID: <20190101045638.D280E1F56@spqr.komquats.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
What would having another language in base buy us? This reminds me of a cou= ple of months ago at OpenHack Victoria someone was trying to convince me th= at the kernel needed a JavaVM. (Sure we each had a few beers) but the simil= arity of this discussion doesn't escape me. Kernel modules and functions wr= itten in java^H^H^H^H rust: why? --- Sent using a tiny phone keyboard. Apologies for any typos and autocorrect. Also, this old phone only supports top post. Apologies. Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> or <cy@freebsd.org> The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few. --- -----Original Message----- From: Peter Jeremy Sent: 31/12/2018 18:48 To: Igor Mozolevsky Cc: Hackers freeBSD Subject: Re: Speculative: Rust for base system components On 2019-Jan-01 00:53:48 +0000, Igor Mozolevsky <igor@hybrid-lab.co.uk> wrot= e: >Quite frankly the compile time isn't really *that* important, I disagree. FreeBSD seems to be heading back to the batch days - you submit your buildworld request and come back tomorrow to see if it worked. That is a significant hinderance to development and, based on various mailing list comments, is causing breakage because developers are cutting corners due to the pain involved in running "make universe" before they make a large change. >longer (if not much longer) build times might push toward a better >modularisation and compartmentalisation of the OS and the kernel so a >small change in the kernel, for example, doesn't require the >recompilation of the whole damn thing when nothing else is affected. Two problems here: 1) make doesn't seem to be sufficient to correctly describe a dependency tree to allow incremental/partial builds (at, everyone I'm aware of who has a successful incremental build system has started by migrating off make). This means that a significant part of the work will be re-writing the FreeBSD build system into something else like (eg) Bazel. 2) The bottleneck very quickly turns into the linker. --=20 Peter Jeremy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20190101045638.D280E1F56>