If Linux Was Written in Rust, 80% or More of Linux Developers Would Not Understand It (Same If It's Composed by LLM Slop)
Old: The Life of Linux Will Be Shortened by a Misguided Adoption of Rust
Two days ago (the typical old talking point/rationale): Greg Kroah-Hartman estimates 80 percent of kernel security vulnerabilities would have been impossible in Rust (and over 80% of its developers would not be in Linux, either)
Eight days ago: Rust Supply Chain Attack Puts Build-Time Malware in Crates with 245 Million Downloads (dozens of other reports like this one)
The other day SJVN (funded by the 'Linux' Foundation) joined the many who wrote about a kernel anniversary) and towards the end of an article that mentioned almost nothing about GNU he did insert a portion about Torvalds/Linux succeeding owing to GNU's General Public Licence (GPL).
SJVN does not like Stallman and he doesn't hide it. At least he accepts Stallman's good work. At the moment Stallman is being talked to regarding how the licence is being worked around by OSPS ("Open Source Proprietary Software").
Linux seems to be besieged at two levels: 1) the new (Rust) code is made incomprehensible to the most veteran/critical developers; 2) the new code is not understood by anybody, it's LLM slop
Can Torvalds wake up before it's too late? Is it already too late?
The licence (GPL) is not enough when there are ways to bypass it. █