> What about legacy systems, which may not have a rust toolchain?
Linux's attitude has always been either you keep up or you get dropped - see the lack of any stable driver API and the ruthless pruning of unmaintained drivers.
> What about new architectures that may come up in the future?
Who's to say they won't have a Rust compiler? Who's to say they will have a C one?
Linux also cant be built by any minimal c compiler for obscure arch, it requires many gcc extensions. Its only because llvm added them that its also can be compiled with llvm
> Linux's attitude has always been either you keep up or you get dropped
Gonna need a citation on that one. Drivers are removed when they don't have users anymore, and a user piping up is enough to keep the driver in the tree:
For example:
> As suggested by both Greg and Jakub, let's remove the ones that look
> are most likely to have no users left and also get in the way of the
> wext cleanup. If anyone is still using any of these, we can revert the
> driver removal individually.
Or the x32 platform removal proposal, which didn't happen against after some users showed up:
> > > I'm seriously considering sending a patch to remove x32 support from
> > > upstream Linux. Here are some problems with it:
> >
> > Apparently the main real use case is for extreme benchmarking. It's
> > the only use-case where the complexity of maintaining a whole
> > development environment and distro is worth it, it seems. Apparently a
> > number of Spec submissions have been done with the x32 model.
> >
> > I'm not opposed to trying to sunset the support, but let's see who complains..
>
> I'm just a single user. I do rely on it though, FWIW.
> […snipped further discussion]
Linux's attitude has always been either you keep up or you get dropped - see the lack of any stable driver API and the ruthless pruning of unmaintained drivers.
> What about new architectures that may come up in the future?
Who's to say they won't have a Rust compiler? Who's to say they will have a C one?