HN Reader

> There are many architectures that NetBSD supports where Rust is not available

Are there many architectures that NetBSD supports where GCC is not available?

The rustc_codegen_gcc project allows using the rustc compiler to target any architecture that GCC supports. I think it is pretty far along.

https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc_codegen_gcc

> getting a Rust compiler running in the first place is hard

> bootstrap relies on a binary package

> the compiler would also have to be part of the base system

The gccrs project aims to make Rust a fully supported language in GCC. It is fully self-hosting and can be built from source. Once accepted, it will be one of the languages you get when you build GCC.

https://github.com/Rust-GCC/gccrs

When gccrs is ready, it will address all the above objections.

Linux faces the same issues. Today, Rust is optional in Linux and can be skipped on any platform not supported in LLVM and rustc. For Rust to become mandatory in Linux, gccrs is going to be required (for some platforms).

> the release cycles of Rust are not compatible with the NetBSD ones

I do not fully grasp the objection here. Obviously NetBSD would not be forced to use any Rust features they cannot compile. And using gccrs for the NetBSD kernel would not prevent them from bundling LLVM and rustc as well if they want.

Anyway, I am not advocating the use of Rust in NetBSD. I am merely pointing out that solutions to the issues raised are being worked on.

> In general, the bootstrap relies on a binary package of the previous version. This is unacceptable for an otherwise source-only, self-contained distribution like the NetBSD sources.

This does not paint the full picture. Rust can be bootstrapped with mrustc, which is written in C++

https://github.com/thepowersgang/mrustc

Now, mrustc supports only Rust 1.74. To build Rust 1.92, you need almost 20 builds. But this can be done from source

Guix has written about bootstrapping Rust from source (they care a lot about this). Here is how it looked like in 2018

https://guix.gnu.org/nb-NO/blog/2018/bootstrapping-rust/

this is the right way to do it. just explain why you think rust is not a good match for your project right now. no politics and no hate for the language.

We need memory safety but Rust is not the answer.

It has no formal spec, changes too fast, depends on third party libraries that change faster than I can breath, and is controlled by a foundation that is controlled by big tech corps.

What could go wrong?

if it can't be build with Ansi C or perhaps old style C++ it is not self contained i think. depending a Language on some fast moving binarys is in my eye a bad decission. Excuse my english. im not a native speaker.